Photons VS.Higgs-boson particle

Discussion in 'Astronomy, Exobiology, & Cosmology' started by machiaventa, Jul 9, 2012.

  1. machiaventa Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    96
    Hey Guys:
    If the only thing that passes through the H/B field is a photon, and not be affected. That seems to be very valuable info. Is it because photons have no mass?, or the feild prevents the photons from aquiring mass.
    I believe that light has mass, when concentrated enough, or maybe I should have said energy. I welcome any enlightenment on this subgect.

    Machiaventa,

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. mathman Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,426
    The basic idea is that the Higgs field is responsible for stuff having rest mass. Light has zero rest mass.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    30,354
    Photons don't interact with the Higgs field. Therefore, they have no mass.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. youreyes amorphous ocean Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,826
    ...and black holes?
     
  8. prometheus viva voce! Moderator

    Messages:
    2,045
    We currently have quite a poor understanding of what's inside a black hole.
     
  9. RealityCheck Banned Banned

    Messages:
    800

    Hi guys.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    youreyes: Well spotted! You beat me to it! I also was wondering about the 'connection' between the black hole 'mass' and the spacetime 'outside' the event horizon (and within) insofar as the hypothesized Higgs Field is concerned.

    For instance, 'something' must act 'within' the event horizon to CONTINUE the alleged 'giving of mass' to the energy-matter features that have crossed the event horizon; else the 'mass' must all be in the form of 'energy only' IMMEDIATELY it crosses the horizon position in space.

    So right there, we have yet another 'tool' for speculating 'either or' states of matter-energy (mass-massless) within the black hole feature itself, from horizon to central 'point/loop' concentration of all the matter-energy that has fallen in.

    So perhaps if this IS a real 'discovery' for the Higgs boson confirming that the Higgs Field 'exists' as postulated, then maybe we have finally a great analytical tool for eventually getting to grips with the 'inside' of a black hole feature, and make models which BRIDGE RELATIVITY with QUANTUM theory?

    prometheus: You would seem ideally situated to explore this aspect/tool which the Higgs (boson and field) may have given us to help with the enigmatic 'physics within black holes' and other extreme Relativity-Quantum 'boundary' situations. Can you and your professional colleagues explore this possibility/area and report back sometime in the next few months? It would be greatly appreciated by more than myself, I assure you!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Cheers youreyes, prometheus, everyone!

    RealityCheck.
     
  10. OnlyMe Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,914
    First, the Hiigs field/mechanism and boson are only involved in explaining the rest mass of some fundamental particles. It/they are not involved in the explanation of ALL mass, as in the mass of complex objects — atoms, molecules and black holes... Even the rest mass of protons and neutrons is not explained completely by the Higgs mechanism. IOW Assumming that the Higgs field explains the rest mass of quarks, when you add the mass of the quarks in a proton up, the proton's rest mass is greater than the combined mass of its parts.

    There is more to mass on a macroscopic scale than what can be explained via the Higgs Mechanism. And at the scale that the Higgs mechanism does explain mass, gravity does not actively contribute to the interactions of those particles that are affected. You are getting into "the theory of everything" when putting these things together. A very big chunk of cheese, that is!

    This last may change if anyone ever comes up with a successful model for quantum gravity. It just has not happened yet.

    Second, even if Prometheus were involved in such work, and I am not sure that is his specialty, assigning the task of reporting back to a form like this, in a few months.....? I suspect anyone comming up with answers to questions like those would be publishing in the journals and waiting for the prize.
     
  11. RealityCheck Banned Banned

    Messages:
    800

    Hi OnlyMe.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Whatever the matter configuration 'outside' the event horizon, the 'spaghettification' and other energetic interactions/forces experienced just before crossing the horizon (especially in lower-solar-mass size BHs) would pretty much 'deconstruct' any complex matter into constituent parts which ARE putatively 'affected' by the Higgs field as hypothsized.

    So the situation is well worth studying/pursuing further by Quantum and Relativist physicists TOGETHER so as to see what comes of using the putative higgs field/mechanism as an 'analysis' tool to explore what may be happening at the transition and within black hole horizons.


    It's more than we have at present, hey? Prometheus pretty much indicated that the state of the art in this area is pretty much 'mute' as things stand at the moment.

    And I merely suggested to Prometheus that he and his colleagues could do a lot worse with some of their time/facilities/talents than pursue further this particular aspect/exploration which "youreyes" was quick to spot as a legitimate and possibly useful/fruitful subject for further study in any case in its own right in view of the supposed 'discovery' at LHC, irrespective of who may wish to be involved or not. It was only a suggested avenue for specific research attention given the observation that 'something' must give the enetring energy-mass feature the 'mass-energy' CUMULATIVE GRAVITATIONAL MASS/ENERGY to maintain the BLACK Hole condition.

    Yeah, it's right 'on the boundary' between Relativity and Quantum theory domains, so REAL COMPLEX theory/analytical modeling/conceptualizing whichever way one looks at the prospect of researching there!

    Good luck to anyone brave enough to attempt it as indicated/suggested by youreyes and myself!

    Cheers, OnlyMe, youreyes, prometheus, everyone!

    RealityCheck.

    .
     
  12. hansda Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,182
    This is a case of 'frame-dragging' effect .
     
  13. OnlyMe Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,914
    Hansda, I believe this has become your answer to everything.

    Part of the issue here is that the Higgs field/mechanism and boson are part of the standard model of particle physics. The Lense-Thirring or frame-dragging effect, emerges from GR which deals with physics, at an astronomical and macrocosmic scale.

    So far no one has come up with a grand unified theory, that remains consistent with the success of both QM and GR. That makes it difficult to project many of the mechanisms of either QM or GR, at the scale that the other addresses.

    IOW The Higgs mechanism cannot at present be used to explain things like black holes and frame dragging that belong to GR. And the frame-dragging effect, which itself emerges from an interaction between space/spacetime and gravity, cannot be used to explain the Higgs mechanism.
     
    Last edited: Jul 11, 2012
  14. arfa brane call me arf Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,305
    I'll say. Someone thought it was a collection of Rubik's cubes, which could explain Hawking radiation.

    It doesn't, unfortunately for the cube nutters.
     
  15. machiaventa Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    96
    Photons Have No Mass ?

    Hey Gus:
    If light has no mass , how could it propell a solar sail? Maginfied light has energy, using a maginfying glass you can burn paper. Therefore light has energy. Energy in constant motion has mass? Does it only work the other way E=Mc2. Matter and mass are the same?:shrug:

    Machiaventa
     
  16. OnlyMe Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,914
    In some form or another this question keeps comming up. For as well known as the equation \(E = mc^2\) is, it is not well understood from a lay perspective. This is not entirely the fault of misinterpretation by interested lay persons. It is as much the fault of the media and even recognized scientists, who present lay oriented explanations.

    This equation describes only the Energy represented by the rest or invariant mass of a particle or object. It does not say that ALL energy and mass are equivalent.

    It's origin lies in a paper by Einstein describing how the mass of an atom changes with the emission and absorption of photons, which have no mass. IOW A massless photon (energy) can change the mass of a massive complex object.

    It does not mean that sound, which is a form of kinetic energy, is equivalent to mass, or that it can become mass. It does not mean that all forms of heat, which can be both a kinetic form of energy and/or an electromagnetic form of energy, is the same as mass or that in all cases heat can change the rest mass of any complex object. (As long as one accepts that the absorption and emmission of photons can add and subtract from the mass of an atom, heat in the form of EM radiation must have the same potential, in those situations where the photon is absorbed or emmitted.)

    In some ways what it does to the concept of mass is conceptually change it from a fundamental substance, something that makes up or is a part of matter, to an emergent characteristic, of matter.

    Still the equation E = mc^2 does not mean that ALL energy can become mass, or that ALL energy and mass are equal.

    And that is both as simple as I can put it at the moment and an obviously incomplete explanation.
     
  17. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    30,354
    Although photons have no mass, they do carry momentum, and so they can exert a force.

    Mass is a measure of the resistance of an object to being accelerated - i.e. mass is a measure of inertia. Mass is a property that matter has, among other properties.
     
  18. hansda Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,182
    Not exactly but when i find 'frame-dragging' as a possible cause to explain some physical event like this , i try to mention it .

    Particle photon being attracted towards Black Hole is a case of frame-dragging and not a case of gravity . So, here particle photon need not interact with HIGG's Field to generate mass or gravity for photon .

    We know that a spinning mass causes frame dragging when its angular momentum is quite high . In frame dragging space itself is dragged alongwith the spinning mass .

    We know that a photon particle travels in a straight line and its medium of travel is space . If space is dragged , photon particle also will be dragged along with the space . Due to frame-dragging effect space is dragged , so a ray of light curves around the spinning mass causing frame-dragging .

    So, a ray of light bends around the Sun due frame-dragging . A Black Hole is also a spinning mass with very high angular momentum . Black Holes have thousands of solar mass. So, their angular momentum and frame-dragging effect is much higher than the Sun . This frame-dragging effect is so high that particle photon can not escape the Black-Hole.

    This may appear as if photon particle has some mass and is attracted towards BH due to its high gravity .

    But in reality , this is only frame-dragging effect .
     
  19. OnlyMe Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,914
    This is not correct. Yes, the path of a photon is affected by the curvature of space, which is affected by the frame-dragging effect.., but the effect of gravity itself is far greater than that of frame dragging and the curvature resulting from gravity is far greater than that of frame-dragging.

    Most of the above works.., the portion in red is not accurate or in the least misleading. Space is curved by matter. According to GR gravity is the result and when the matter is spinning, in addition to the curvature associated with gravity, there is a much smaller curvature described as twisting, or frame-dragging. The ray of light does follow a straight line in flat space-time, but that straight line becomes curved, in a manner that is consistent with the curvature associated with gravity and to a lesser extent the frame-dragging effect.

    Again it seems you are placing too much importance on the frame-dragging effect, over that of gravity itself. Light can bend around a gravitational mass in all directions, not just in the direction of any spin and frame-dragging. While black holes can have even millions of solar masses, the force of gravity and the frame dragging effect outside a black hole's event horizon drops off in the same way that they do around any gravitational mass.

    Yes it is likely that any frame dragging effect at or near the event horizon of a black hole is greater than near most if not all, other astronomical objects, but the frame-dragging effect does not magically become greater than the gravitational effect.

    Hansda, do a search on the Gravity Probe B experiment (GP-P). There is a lot of information available directly from the project site that is lay oriented or at least not so technical that it requires a great deal of mathematics to understand it. The frame-dragging effect that was confirmed was measured in arc seconds per year, while if the satellite were not in orbit, it would have burned up in the atmosphere in far less time than that.

    Think about it, on the surface of the earth, gravity "pulls" you toward the center of the earth at about 32 ft/second/second. The earth being about 8000 miles in diameter that is just 4000 miles from its center. Since the force of gravity decreases in an inverse square relationship to the distance, a satellite 4000 miles above the "surface" of the earth experiences a gravitational "force" of about 8 ft/second/second... And that is far more than the arc seconds that the frame-dragging effect is measured in.

    Frame-dragging is an important aspect of the interaction between matter and space or spacetime, but it is not more important or greater than the "force" of gravity, we think of as the pull, we measure as weight. And the path that light takes as it passes a gravitational mass is influenced far more by gravity than the frame-dragging effect.
     
  20. AlphaNumeric Fully ionized Moderator

    Messages:
    6,697
    The Higgs mechanism gives various masses by breaking a symmetry in the electroweak sector using the Higgs boson. In the electroweak sector pre-Higgs breaking you have 4 types of particles which are all massless but all of which couple to the Higgs. You turn on the Higgs vacuum expectation and reshuffle your particle fields to collect them in a particular way dictated by their Higgs couplings from before. You still have 4 types of particles except now 3 of them have a rest mass (the Z and Ws from the Standard Model). The photon is the combination of pre-breaking fields which has no mass term. It doesn't gain a mass term because of a residual symmetry which isn't broken by the Higgs mechanism. This is the U(1) of quantum electrodynamics. Using this model it's possible to make the following equivalent statements : 1. The photon has no rest mass. 2. The photon is a U(1) gauge field so doesn't self interact. 3. Electromagnetic charge is conserved. This provides a set of tests for this model because if we experimentally see one or two of those instances without the rest then something is wrong. So formally what prevents the photon gaining a mass is a residual abelian symmetry in the electroweak sector.
     
  21. youreyes amorphous ocean Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,826
    AlphaNumeric, can photon's residual abelian symmetry be broken through Nambu-Goldstone Modes?
     
  22. hansda Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,182
    So, it is proved that particle photon is massless and can not interact with the gravitational force of a mass.

    Thus, particle photon being attracted towards black-hole(BH) is a case of frame-dragging effect.
     
  23. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    30,354
    No. Photons are affected by gravity. They have no rest mass, though.

    No.
     

Share This Page