[armyowalgreens]

They did not confirm the existence of the Higgs-Boson. They measured a particle with characteristics closely matching the predicted traits of the Higgs-Boson. Only through further testing will they be able to confirm the likelihood of the Higgs-Boson. 
 
As of right now I think they have a confidence of 5 standard deviations. Which, for almost any other field of study, would be immense evidence; near irrefutable proof. However, due to the still largely unrealized quantity of subatomic particles, this is not definitive proof. 

 

[Currawong]

As per the Posting Guidelines (linked at the top of every forum and in my signature), religious discussion isn't permitted, so some posts have been removed. Sorry.

 

[Maverickmonk]

They did not confirm the existence of the Higgs-Boson. They measured a particle with characteristics closely matching the predicted traits of the Higgs-Boson. Only through further testing will they be able to confirm the likelihood of the Higgs-Boson. 

As of right now I think they have a confidence of 5 standard deviations. Which, for almost any other field of study, would be immense evidence; near irrefutable proof. However, due to the still largely unrealized quantity of subatomic particles, this is not definitive proof. 

If something behaves exactly as an HB, doesn't that make it an HB? My subatomic particle knowledge beyond the behavior of the electron is mostly wikipedia based. Feel free to enlighten me


Also: this makes me want to switch my grad school aspirations from engineering to physics... why isn't there enough time to learn everything!!

 

[Rath1on]

Quote:

If something behaves exactly as an HB, doesn't that make it an HB? My subatomic particle knowledge beyond the behavior of the electron is mostly wikipedia based. Feel free to enlighten me

Also: this makes me want to switch my grad school aspirations from engineering to physics... why isn't there enough time to learn everything!!

Not really. What they mean by "behaves like the Higgs" means there's something that's decaying into the particles they are looking for. Since the Higgs only "exists" for a teeny fraction of a millisecond, they look for the effects of the Higgs instead of the Higgs itself. They see the effects of something decaying into particles and being eaten up by the rest of the matter. So, it's something that's doing what Higgs is supposed to do. That doesn't mean it is Higgs. It's confusing, but it's quantum mechanics, so that's to be expected. 
If you're interested in learning more about it without needing 67 Doctorate degrees, look up the quantum diaries on google. It's a blog kept by particle physicists at CERN and around the world. Each time you come across a term you don't know, they will usually have it highlighted and it will go to a link that has a blog that explains it. A good place to start is learning about feynman diagrams.
 
Here is the Feynman Diagram post: http://www.quantumdiaries.org/2010/02/14/lets-draw-feynman-diagams/
 
And here's Higgs Part 1: http://www.quantumdiaries.org/2011/11/21/why-do-we-expect-a-higgs-boson-part-i-electroweak-symmetry-breaking/
 
You'll need to have an understanding of the entire standard model and basic quantum mechanics to understand Higgs, so you'll be working your way backwards from the Higgs post. Get what I mean? There's a lot to learn between the Feynman rules and Higgs behavior. For instance, the Higgs unifies the weak nuclear force with electromagnetism and then breaks it. Those forces are particles in the standard model and you need to understand how they work.

 

[antberg]

Sorry about that Currawong.

 

[Maverickmonk]

Not really. What they mean by "behaves like the Higgs" means there's something that's decaying into the particles they are looking for. Since the Higgs only "exists" for a teeny fraction of a millisecond, they look for the effects of the Higgs instead of the Higgs itself. They see the effects of something decaying into particles and being eaten up by the rest of the matter. So, it's something that's doing what Higgs is supposed to do. That doesn't mean it is Higgs. It's confusing, but it's quantum mechanics, so that's to be expected. 

If you're interested in learning more about it without needing 67 Doctorate degrees, look up the quantum diaries on google. It's a blog kept by particle physicists at CERN and around the world. Each time you come across a term you don't know, they will usually have it highlighted and it will go to a link that has a blog that explains it. A good place to start is learning about feynman diagrams.

Here is the Feynman Diagram post: http://www.quantumdiaries.org/2010/02/14/lets-draw-feynman-diagams/

And here's Higgs Part 1: http://www.quantumdiaries.org/2011/11/21/why-do-we-expect-a-higgs-boson-part-i-electroweak-symmetry-breaking/

You'll need to have an understanding of the entire standard model and basic quantum mechanics to understand Higgs, so you'll be working your way backwards from the Higgs post. Get what I mean? There's a lot to learn between the Feynman rules and Higgs behavior. For instance, the Higgs unifies the weak nuclear force with electromagnetism and then breaks it. Those forces are particles in the standard model and you need to understand how they work.

Like our prof. Said, if quantum makes sense, it's obvious you aren't studying it hard enough. Thanks for the links though!

 

[Maverickmonk]

Not really. What they mean by "behaves like the Higgs" means there's something that's decaying into the particles they are looking for. Since the Higgs only "exists" for a teeny fraction of a millisecond, they look for the effects of the Higgs instead of the Higgs itself. They see the effects of something decaying into particles and being eaten up by the rest of the matter. So, it's something that's doing what Higgs is supposed to do. That doesn't mean it is Higgs. It's confusing, but it's quantum mechanics, so that's to be expected. 

If you're interested in learning more about it without needing 67 Doctorate degrees, look up the quantum diaries on google. It's a blog kept by particle physicists at CERN and around the world. Each time you come across a term you don't know, they will usually have it highlighted and it will go to a link that has a blog that explains it. A good place to start is learning about feynman diagrams.

Here is the Feynman Diagram post: http://www.quantumdiaries.org/2010/02/14/lets-draw-feynman-diagams/

And here's Higgs Part 1: http://www.quantumdiaries.org/2011/11/21/why-do-we-expect-a-higgs-boson-part-i-electroweak-symmetry-breaking/

You'll need to have an understanding of the entire standard model and basic quantum mechanics to understand Higgs, so you'll be working your way backwards from the Higgs post. Get what I mean? There's a lot to learn between the Feynman rules and Higgs behavior. For instance, the Higgs unifies the weak nuclear force with electromagnetism and then breaks it. Those forces are particles in the standard model and you need to understand how they work.

Like our prof. Said, if quantum makes sense, it's obvious you aren't studying it hard enough. Thanks for the links though!

 

[armyowalgreens]

Quote:

If something behaves exactly as an HB, doesn't that make it an HB? My subatomic particle knowledge beyond the behavior of the electron is mostly wikipedia based. Feel free to enlighten me

Also: this makes me want to switch my grad school aspirations from engineering to physics... why isn't there enough time to learn everything!!

The amount of observable data from a single particle collision is so miniscule it is nearly nothing. They don't even directly observe the product of the collision. They see how it interacts with it's surroundings. It requires incredible redundancy to decide if an indirectly observed particle is one predicted.