tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post5346617356407247796..comments2023-09-27T07:44:19.769-04:00Comments on Sabine Hossenfelder: Backreaction: The Higgs MassSabine Hossenfelderhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comBlogger37125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-17589865466100550112008-03-28T21:42:00.000-04:002008-03-28T21:42:00.000-04:00Hi Stefan,I like your 007 analogy. Megalomaniacs l...Hi Stefan,<BR/><BR/>I like your 007 analogy. Megalomaniacs like Blofeld in Goldeneye are amusing, but physicists in the real world who spend $10 billion on a potentially dumb and dangerous experiment should be given even more scrutiny. Keep in mind too that writers like the late Arthur C. Clarke, H.G. Welles and Jules Verne were visionaries too.<BR/><BR/>There are many potential dangers at the Alan Gillishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00891733244573571562noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-83329533299725926422008-03-19T23:48:00.000-04:002008-03-19T23:48:00.000-04:00Hi Stefan & Bee,Stefan you essentially gave Alan t...Hi Stefan & Bee,<BR/><BR/>Stefan you essentially gave Alan the professional opinion which I suggested he should have sought prior to posting his blog (the comment he held back). This kind of opinion he should have sought before he wrote his blog, alerting and I suspect more to worry those would might read his piece to suggest that the LHC was some sort of doomsday machine. He hints that all the Phil Warnellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15671311338712852659noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-53590034365695188072008-03-19T20:43:00.000-04:002008-03-19T20:43:00.000-04:00Hi Alan,I hadn't noticed your comment before, sorr...Hi Alan,<BR/><BR/><BR/>I hadn't noticed your comment before, sorry... I don't think this is the right place for a discussion about this, but let me just comment on the physics points you have mentioned. <BR/><BR/> Hmm, the energy equivalent to <I>100 kg of TNT</I> mentioned by <A HREF="http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/print/26015" REL="nofollow">Steve Myers in the Physics World article</A>, orstefanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09495628046446378453noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-84970545816165732402008-03-19T12:39:00.000-04:002008-03-19T12:39:00.000-04:00Alan, Phil: I currently don't have the time to rea...Alan, Phil: I currently don't have the time to read whatever you are talking about. If you want to continue this discussion, please do it elsewhere, or I will just delete everything. <BR/><BR/>Alan, I can't find any comment at the post you mentioned above, but given that Phil is one of the most polite commenters we've ever had at this blog, I find it hard to believe all he said was a two line Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-77525954435559079192008-03-19T11:50:00.000-04:002008-03-19T11:50:00.000-04:00Regarding Phil Warren's comment: Although he sugge...Regarding Phil Warren's comment: Although he suggests that his comment sent to me "addresses your concerns", it is nothing more than a 2 line insult without any critique of data or analysis, so not worth publishing.<BR/><BR/>As regarding LHC potential dangers, you need look no further than some of CERN's own concerns. Steve Myers, who is the head of accelerators and beams at CERN was interviewed Alan Gillishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00891733244573571562noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-61976556940298909372008-03-17T22:17:00.000-04:002008-03-17T22:17:00.000-04:00Alan,I left a comment that addresses your concern ...Alan,<BR/><BR/>I left a comment that addresses your concern on your <A HREF="http://bigsciencenews.blogspot.com/" REL="nofollow">blog</A>. I notice that all comments are first viewed by you before they are posted. If you actually release it to be read, I will at least be less skeptical as to your understanding, motives and tactics.<BR/><BR/><BR/>Hi Bee,<BR/><BR/>Sorry Bee, as this is your blog Phil Warnellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15671311338712852659noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-42997368085646367452008-03-17T21:36:00.000-04:002008-03-17T21:36:00.000-04:00Hi again Bee and ph=f,A correction and another que...Hi again Bee and ph=f,<BR/><BR/>A correction and another question. It's the Tevatron at Fermilab with the greatest collision energies so far, at 1.9 TeV.<BR/><BR/>The other point is something of a minor or major revelation. Depends on what happens at the LHC. I've been studying this installation for months to produce a definitive guide that unphysicists can follow, though as serious science Alan Gillishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00891733244573571562noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-23548023389357282562008-03-11T20:18:00.000-04:002008-03-11T20:18:00.000-04:00Hi Bee and Stephan,Perhaps the Higgs question is a...Hi Bee and Stephan,<BR/><BR/>Perhaps the Higgs question is a moot one. When astrophysicists suggest that 96% of the Universe is dark energy and dark matter, with no provision in the Standard Model for them, what's the use of a $10 billion experiment at the LHC, largely focused on finding the Higgs?<BR/><BR/>Certainly we're going to find something or nothing that can be analyzed. Don't forget Alan Gillishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00891733244573571562noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-68267496673706841642008-01-08T12:45:00.000-05:002008-01-08T12:45:00.000-05:00Hi Low Math:Theoretically, these two values have n...Hi Low Math:<BR/><BR/>Theoretically, these two values have nothing to do with each other. In the Mexican hat potential for the Higgs (μ^2 φ^2 + λ φ^4) there are two free parameters. They are related to the VEV and mass as v = \sqrt(- μ^2/λ), and M_h= v^2 λ (up to factors of order one), but they remain two independent parameters. v can be expressed through the (Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-4074204744510270552008-01-08T12:30:00.000-05:002008-01-08T12:30:00.000-05:00Thanks for another wonderful post!A question: It ...Thanks for another wonderful post!<BR/><BR/>A question: It appears that the VEV of the Higgs field (which seems to have a very precise value from theory) and the mass of the Higgs boson have little to do with one another, besides the fact that nothing would have mass without a non-zero VEV.<BR/><BR/>Could you elaborate a little (i.e., hand-wave enough so that my head doesn't explode) on where Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-29443780094683922572008-01-08T06:17:00.000-05:002008-01-08T06:17:00.000-05:00Hi Bee,Thanks so much for pointing to those two pr...Hi Bee,<BR/><BR/>Thanks so much for pointing to those two previous posts that you put up. Some of this I am aware of and yet some indeed is new to me. The confusion resultant of the theoretical expectation of the vacuum energy and the observed I found particularly enlightening. It also serves to make it clear (for me) that even if the higgs is discover (despite the energy level) that this will Phil Warnellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15671311338712852659noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-41059104275906526172008-01-07T02:22:00.000-05:002008-01-07T02:22:00.000-05:00Hi Michael,thanks again for the enlightening comme...Hi Michael,<BR/><BR/>thanks again for the enlightening comments!<BR/><BR/>Actually, the idea of the "plottl a month" is not a bad one, we will think about that! It's good to hear that some of our readers have appreciated and enjoyed the series so far :-). <BR/><BR/>Best, Stefanstefanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09495628046446378453noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-66503620657036018362008-01-06T14:02:00.000-05:002008-01-06T14:02:00.000-05:00Hi Phil: No need to apologize. Best - B.Hi Phil: No need to apologize. Best - B.Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-14288331770023136012008-01-06T13:57:00.000-05:002008-01-06T13:57:00.000-05:00Hi Bee,Sorry about me getting it all wrong again. ...Hi Bee,<BR/><BR/>Sorry about me getting it all wrong again. How do you put up with us novices? Anyway, as you advised I will look over the material you suggest and let you get back to your chalk board. <BR/><BR/>Best,<BR/><BR/>PhilPhil Warnellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15671311338712852659noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-73602990663586565142008-01-06T11:47:00.000-05:002008-01-06T11:47:00.000-05:00Hi Phil,No, that was not what I said. I didn't say...Hi Phil,<BR/><BR/>No, that was not what I said. I didn't say the Higgs is oblivious of gravity, I said the mass generation via the Higgs-mechanism doesn't have anything to do with the presence or absence of gravity (at least in the standard picture). The Higgs couples to gravity as everything else does. Regarding the vacuum energy problem in quantum field theories, you might find <A HREF="http://Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-46787641321061952492008-01-06T10:55:00.000-05:002008-01-06T10:55:00.000-05:00Hi Bee,Thanks again for the response. This clears ...Hi Bee,<BR/><BR/>Thanks again for the response. This clears things up somewhat. Are you in essence saying that the higgs field (not boson) is oblivious to the gravitational one or again do I have something wrong? It seems strange that a field that is supposed to be responsible for mass is not coupled to the field that reacts to part of what it is responsible for. So that gravity is not actually Phil Warnellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15671311338712852659noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-6277564915922533192008-01-06T10:25:00.000-05:002008-01-06T10:25:00.000-05:00Hi,I'm happy to see this discussion continue!Tomma...Hi,<BR/><BR/>I'm happy to see this discussion continue!<BR/><BR/>Tommaso gave a nice answer to Stefan's question, and I won't expand upon it here.<BR/><BR/>Concerning the <B>non-observation</B> of a Higgs boson - that would be extremely important. First, the standard model says there must be a Higgs boson with certain properties, and the LHC definitely will see it, if it exists, given enough Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-40133236341531844642008-01-05T21:48:00.000-05:002008-01-05T21:48:00.000-05:00I am really ignorant of the Higgs physics processe...I am really ignorant of the Higgs physics processes but does the paper suggests that we need to know the new physics (what they say it predicts) before we recognize what is going to be a very difficult signature? And does this suggest that if the Higgs is light we may have already seen the Higgs at say the Tevatron buried in the data.Mark A. Thomashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17778645909479260869noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-86895515099789167702008-01-05T20:32:00.000-05:002008-01-05T20:32:00.000-05:00Hi Tommaso, Mark, Haelfix and Muon:Thanks for your...Hi Tommaso, Mark, Haelfix and Muon:<BR/><BR/>Thanks for your interesting comments!<BR/><BR/>I was wondering what you think about this scenario:<BR/><BR/><A HREF="http://arxiv.org/abs/0709.1505" REL="nofollow">The Higgs Decay Width in Multi-Scalar Doublet Models</A><BR/><BR/>arXiv: 0709.1505 [hep-ph]<BR/><BR/>Where the Higgs decay looks significantly different, and wouldn't show up at the LHC as Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-24765123502874591522008-01-05T20:22:00.000-05:002008-01-05T20:22:00.000-05:00Hi Phil,No, the value of the CC is about 15 orders...Hi Phil,<BR/><BR/>No, the value of the CC is about 15 orders of magnitude below the vacuum expectation value (vev)of the Higgs. It is irrelevant if you add this to the above estimate. That gap between the scales actually is a big part of the problem. But either way, I think you are mixing up two different issues here. The relevant thing about the Higgs isn't only that its vev is non-zero, but Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-30341096910526539842008-01-05T14:44:00.000-05:002008-01-05T14:44:00.000-05:00Hi haelfix,thanks for the explanations and for poi...Hi haelfix,<BR/><BR/><BR/>thanks for the explanations and for pointing out to me the STU paramatrisation and the Peskin & Takeuchi papers! <BR/><BR/>Searching for these, I stumbled upon this <A HREF="http://ppd.fnal.gov/conferences/nlc/minutes/000426.html" REL="nofollow">discussion on what's behind the precision electroweak fits that are discussed so often</A> at the Fermilab web site, which stefanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09495628046446378453noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-43712217458605461072008-01-05T13:59:00.000-05:002008-01-05T13:59:00.000-05:00Usually, nature has her way. If the Higg does exis...Usually, nature has her way. If the Higg does exist it is probably sits in the huge background cloud that would be at 115 GeV. So far she has not made it easy for us and for all the money thrown at the problem it will unlikely be presented on an easy "golden platter" (or grail) for our ecstasy.Mark A. Thomashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17778645909479260869noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-25882595435212870372008-01-05T12:16:00.000-05:002008-01-05T12:16:00.000-05:00Hi Bee and Stefan,Not to be a pest, yet in looking...Hi Bee and Stefan,<BR/><BR/>Not to be a pest, yet in looking at the parabola you supplied I’m curious if the slope increases exponentially (vertically) or that it approaches linear (straight line) characteristics? Of course this in the effort of my attempt to understand what the likelihood of being able to construct a collider that would find the higgs in the unfortunate event that the current Phil Warnellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15671311338712852659noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-70708502742745979282008-01-05T11:10:00.000-05:002008-01-05T11:10:00.000-05:00Hi T,That was an enlightening explanation as to th...Hi T,<BR/><BR/>That was an enlightening explanation as to the complexities involved in the search of the higg’s boson. I also wait with great anticipation to what you and the others may find. I am always impressed that so much can be discovered in such a complex process. That is, to use the old analogy to compare what you do as to smashing a couple of pianos into each other and by observing inPhil Warnellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15671311338712852659noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-2926890701718512552008-01-05T09:07:00.000-05:002008-01-05T09:07:00.000-05:00Hi Stefan,I wish to pay a tribute to your nice pos...Hi Stefan,<BR/><BR/>I wish to pay a tribute to your nice post here and answer the question you pose about the counter-intuitive trend of discovery reach at the LHC versus Higgs mass (for a given integrated luminosity), waiting for Michael's posts on the Higgs. <BR/><BR/>The problem is that as the Higgs mass changes, the mixture of possible final states it decays into changes dramatically. So, Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com