Happy 5th Higgs Day!

[Alex K]

5 years ago this day, the discovery of a new Boson which closely matched the properties of the theorized Higgs boson, was announced at the European Center for nuclear Research CERN near Geneva. The boson was discovered simulatneously by the two big experiments at the Large Hadron Collider which were designed for this purpose, called CMS and ATLAS. Behind each of these abbreviations are more than 3000 researchers from institutions all over the world. The discovery talk for the ATLAS Experiment was given by Fabiola Gianotti, who has since become the DG (Director General) of CERN and thus is, in more ways than one, the Popess of particle physics sans the infallibility (CERN is an autonomous transnational entity). The discovery talk for the CMS Experiment was given by the American Joe Incandela.

The boson was predicted to exist in this form in 1967 by Steve Weinberg, Abdus Salam and Sheldon Glashow, who were Building on work by Peter Higgs and several others (Kibble, Brout, Englert, Anderson, I am forgetting some) done back in 1964. In other words, the discovery of the Higgs boson was expected for 45 years, and was then discovered to exist and have exactly the properties predicted in the 60s. This is both great and very problematic for fundamental physics. On the one hand, it impressively demonstrated how powerful the prinicples of theoretical physics and the machinery of experimental particle physics are. On the other hand, it once again left the theoretical state of the art of fundamental particle physics stuck in the past. Physicists would love nothing more than a radical discovery which overturns what we thought we know for decades, but that is precisely not what has happened. Had we not discovered the Higgs boson but something different, that would have meant a revolution in physics. Now, this revolution is still making us wait, and it is uncertain what the future of the field holds.

[Succubus]

Mass Celebration.

[Thumpalumpacus]

The fact that science is always a tentative process, and looking forward to the next rethinking, is what commands my respect. We live in interesting times.

[LadyForCamus]

5 years ago this day, the discovery of a new Boson which closely matched the properties of the theorized Higgs boson, was announced at the European Center for nuclear Research CERN near Geneva. The boson was discovered simulatneously by the two big experiments at the Large Hadron Colliderwhich were designed for this purpose, called CMS and ATLAS. Behind each of these abbreviations are more than 3000 researchers from institutions all over the world. The discovery talk for the ATLAS Experiment was given by Fabiola Gianotti, who has since become the DG (Director General) of CERN and thus is, in more ways than one, the Popess of particle physics sans the infallibility (CERN is an autonomous transnational entity). The discovery talk for the CMS Experiment was given by the American Joe Incandela.

The boson was predicted to exist in this form in 1967 by Steve Weinberg, Abdus Salam and Sheldon Glashow, who were Building on work by Peter Higgs and several others (Kibble, Brout, Englert, Anderson, I am forgetting some) done back in 1964. In other words, the discovery of the Higgs boson was expected for 45 years, and was then discovered to exist and have exactly the properties predicted in the 60s. This is both great and very problematic for fundamental physics. On the one hand, it impressively demonstrated how powerful the prinicples of theoretical physics and the machinery of experimental particle physics are. On the other hand, it once again left the theoretical state of the art of fundamental particle physics stuck in the past. Physicists would love nothing more than a radical discovery which overturns what we thought we know for decades, but that is precisely not what has happened. Had we not discovered the Higgs boson but something different, that would have meant a revolution in physics. Now, this revolution is still making us wait, and it is uncertain what the future of the field holds.

Sorry; thought that said 'Large Hard-on Collider.'  I've been drinking.  But yeah;
physics!  Woot!

[The Valkyrie]

This didn't really happen.

If it had there would have been a black hole produced and the universe would have ended!

Evidence? Look at the sort of sites Scoobs would have linked to.

You're all sheep!

[Alex K]

Also, parts of the LHC were delivered using helicopters, and we all know that that don't fly.

[JackRussell]

Also, parts of the LHC were delivered using helicopters, and we all know that that don't fly.

Gravity is a real rock crusher for sure.

I know this is an odd question, but is there any odd outcome of a LHC experiment that could hypothesised now in a sensible way to take particle physics in a completely new direction?

And why is it such a big problem that the standard model still seems robust, just because physicists know it's incomplete?

I admit I find physics fascinating, but I really struggle to understand the difficult stuff at all.

[Alex K]

Also, parts of the LHC were delivered using helicopters, and we all know that that don't fly.

Gravity is a real rock crusher for sure.

Vertical, too....

I know this is an odd question, but is there any odd outcome of a LHC experiment that could hypothesised now in a sensible way to take particle physics in a completely new direction?

Well... some of my work dealt with small additional dimensions of space, and how to detect them at the LHC via the resonances that occur in such dimensions. That kind of Thing has been analyzed by a lot of people, and would be quite the revolution if it were discovered.

And why is it such a big problem that the standard model still seems robust, just because physicists know it's incomplete?

Before the Higgs boson was discovered, it was relatively obvious that the Standard model without it would be inconsistent, and something had to exist in a certain energy range to fix this inconsistency, either the Higgs boson or something else doing ist job. Then the Higgs boson was discovered. Now, we 1. don't know how neutrinos get their mass 2. what dark matter is made of 3. why the higgs boson is relatively light 4. why there is matter and no antimatter left in the universe. Unlike before, where the mathematical inconsistency of our model was "forcing" nature to have the answers up its sleeve in the range of our experiments, we now have no hard mathematical inconsistency that tells us that yep, these new questions can definitely be answered doing this or that experiment. It's kind of like knowing there is a new continent out there in the ocean and sailing out into the unknown, but you don't know how big the ocean is. Whereas with the Higgs boson, we knew there has to be land in reach.

I admit I find physics fascinating, but I really struggle to understand the difficult stuff at all.

It's difficult for everyone...

[ignoramus]

Alex, do you think this and the double slit and other as yet unexplained phenomena are all linked in some way?
Maybe the next big breakthrough will be the one which will cause the paradigm shift in our species. It may take longer if this is the case.
Also, do you believe there are some things in our reality which we as evolved monkeys can never know or understand in the quantum world?

[Alex K]

Alex, do you think this and the double slit and other as yet unexplained phenomena are all linked in some way?
Maybe the next big breakthrough will be the one which will cause the paradigm shift in our species. It may take longer if this is the case.
Also, do you believe there are some things in our reality which we as evolved monkeys can never know or understand in the quantum world?

The double slit and all other Quantum phenomena are at the time treated somewhat separately from those questions, i.e. one assumes that Quantum mechanics is correct the way it is, and Kind of incorporates it as a Basic Feature into all the theories of particle physics, just like relativity. The attempts to actually consider nonstandard versions of Quantum mechanics in order to answer Problems about particle physics are very rare because Quantum mechanics works so incredibly well. So, I suspect many scientists working in the field would probably say that the two questions do not appear to be closely related at the moment.