The Higgs Boson - Is It Real?
The Higgs boson was apparently found using the Large Hadron Collider (LHC). The machine accelerates protons in opposite directions around a circular 17-mile underground ring and smashes the energetic particle beams head-on. LHC workers seek to reach particle energies many times that of earlier colliders and which, it is believed, mimic the earliest moments of the Universe's origin.
In 2008, the Higgs boson – the so-called "God particle" was said to have been detected: -
FYI - The Higgs Boson
A boson is a quantum mechanical concept. It is a particle that follows Bose-Einstein statistics, which DO NOT restrict their numbers from occupying the same quantum state. Bosons are different than fermions.
Fermions are particles that follow Fermi-Dirac statistics, so they have half-integer spin and obey the Pauli exclusion principle. They include quarks, leptons, and baryons.
The Pauli exclusion principle, by the way, is the quantum mechanical code stating that two or more identical fermions cannot occupy the same quantum state within a quantum system simultaneously.
The name 'Boson' was coined by Paul Dirac to commemorate the contribution of the Indian physicist Satyendra Nath Bose in developing, with Albert Einstein, Bose-Einstein statistics.
The Higgs boson is a subatomic particle postulated by Professor Peter Higgs of the University of Edinburgh, Scotland. It explains why other particles have mass. He said that the boson has only mass and no other characteristics, such as electric charge, so it does NOT respond to electromagnetic influences.
However, it's known from experiments that the application of electromagnetic forces alters the mass of charged subatomic particles, which means that mass is related to the storage of energy within a system of electric charges inside a particle. Mass is directly proportional to energy. That's what the equation:
says, with the square of the speed of light in a vacuum being the constant of proportionality. So, how can a massive particle such as the Higgs boson be constructed without an electric charge?
The problem is inherent in mathematics. Why are mathematicians allowed to take over the science of astrophysics? There's a disconnect between mathematical concepts and reality.
The idea that subatomic particles have mass due to their interaction with Higgs bosons occupying empty space sounds too magical.
Wave a red flag: -
The public, however, is apathetic toward such nonsense.
Matter can neither be created nor destroyed. That's a fundamental law of physics. Yet the destruction or creation of matter is invoked when particles at particular points arise from 'fields' spread over 'space-time,' whatever that is in reality.
What utter nonsense.
Professor Higgs found that parameters in the equations for the 'field' associated with the Higgs boson can be chosen so that the lowest energy state of that field – that is empty space – is NOT zero. With the field energy being 'non-zero' in 'empty' space, all particles interacting with the Higgs boson will gain mass.
You couldn't make it up. It makes NO sense. By saying that matter can be created – which is forbidden in physics – today's astroscientists say that MAGIC can happen, like in the Harry Potter novels.
Field theory, by the way, is a theoretical construct. It may or may not have physical significance.
The statistical significance of the so-called detection of the "God particle" was reported as being at 5-sigma, which implies a certainty of 99.99994%. In particle physics, this is the level of significance required to label experimental observations as a discovery officially.
Research into the properties of the newly discovered particle continues.
Here's the thing: how can a boson have inherent mass but ZERO charge and yet interact with charged matter that has NO intrinsic mass?
The thinking behind the LHC is somewhat confused. At its core is the branch of physics called quantum mechanics, which has an inherent flaw – it permits effects without a cause, such as radioactive decay, which is unpredictable!
Quantum mechanics is not proper physics. Physics aims to better our understanding of the Universe, not worsen it!
It would be best if physicists took a leaf out of a basic chemistry textbook. The London force is the weakest intermolecular force. It's a temporarily attractive force resulting from electrons in adjacent atoms in electrically neutral systems occupying positions that make the atoms form temporary dipoles.
The London force is feeble but adequate to form solids and liquids. It's also, like gravity: always attractive.
Could it be that a neutron is but a temporarily combined proton and electron? One which doesn't last for long on its own, and why it quickly decays back to a proton and electron with the release of electromagnetic energy?
Perhaps our abiding star's electrical environment affects the level of charge distortions. Maybe that's why, when our mother star, a former brown dwarf called Saturn, Earth's gravity was much weaker than it is today. Could that explains why giant lifeforms like dinosaurs, and dragonflies with 24-inch wingspans, could exist on this planet?
Think about that.
A Particle Zoo & the Higgs Boson
Ordinary matter consists of subunits of charge in resonant states of equilibrium. By smashing particles together, we make new short-lived resonant systems of charge, which are then interpreted as members of a weird menagerie of new particles. Particle colliders like the LHC can do no more than that because matter can neither be created nor destroyed.
Clearly, ideas based on the deductive method like black holes, the Big Bang theory, Universal expansion, and undetectable 'dark things' result from the erroneous application of mathematics to explain a model of the Universe dominated by gravity. Mathematics is NOT science.Mainstream astroscientists ignore the tell-tale signs of electrical energy in outer space. If they for once raised their heads out of the sand, took a leaf out of an electrical engineering textbook, and saw the simple connection between electricity and the magnetic effects that they know exist in space, then significant advances in science and technology would be made for the benefit of humankind.
The Big Bang is but a tale to explain creation. It's no different than the Book of Genesis because there's no physics to describe the event. Indeed, the beginning of the Universe is just an abstract concept. Matter cannot appear out of nothing.
It looks like today's astroscientists have no idea of what they are doing. To them, science is what's done when you don't know what you're doing.
Astroscience graduates get steered into institutions where nothing new gets learned. Only surprises come about when new data from space probes, space telescopes, and satellites arrive. Then they have to twist and bend the gravity paradigm to fit the data. Hardly any empirical science is done — what a mess.
If you're one of the herded, be brave and jump ship. Acknowledge that there's a crisis in astroscience and go back to basics.
The public - who fund mainstream science - is gradually becoming restless of all the 'dreamt-up' stuff. School kids are bored with astroscience lessons the way they are. They should not be taught religion as science, or guided into believing that the deductive method and mathematics are the answers to all cosmology questions.
They should not be told lies.