Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

Alarmed_Economics_90 t1_iu0qz9u wrote

I'm not sure it releases energy exactly... I think it's like an energy field that makes it so mass has matter matter has mass.

2

Alarmed_Economics_90 t1_iu0uk31 wrote

Replying to LaunchTransient (#264,412)

No worries. I know enough for whatever Jeopardy questions there might be about the subject, and that's how I measure whether I've probed deeply enough

Edit: though there is that saying about how if you really understand something, you can explain it to a five year old...

1

LaunchTransient t1_iu0vzvf wrote

Replying to Alarmed_Economics_90 (#264,469)

Oh I don't pretend to understand quantum theory or the full standard model. I'm down with general and special relativity, but quantum physics is just bizarre. Supposedly Feynman said "I think I can safely say that nobody really understands quantum mechanics".

I know enough to know when to tap out and let better intellects do the heavy lifting.

3

Chadmartigan t1_iu0zog9 wrote

Replying to Alarmed_Economics_90 (#263,957)

Close but I think you've got it backwards. It's the field that imparts the property of mass to certain particles, specifically: quarks, leptons, and W and Z bosons. The other gauge bosons (photons and gluons) do not interact with Higgs, and are therefore massless.

However, I do not understand how one would release or extract energy from Higgs.

2

Alarmed_Economics_90 t1_iu12co5 wrote

Replying to MarshyBarsh (#265,378)

So it appears that if the higgs field collapses it releases energy. Unfortunately according to that video it also deletes the universe so I'm not sure if we're going to be able to harness that anytime soon but we could work toward it... maybe have tiny little universe deletions that we could create and harness.. I don't know!

Turns out it's a good question!!

1

ryschwith t1_iu13124 wrote

Replying to Alarmed_Economics_90 (#264,286)

Well, I can tell you that a scalar field means that the field only has a field strength value at any given point; as opposed to a vector field which has a field strength value and a direction. Think about a magnetic field and you have some idea of what a vector field is.

I can also tell you that “spin” is a quantum property of particles. It’s like angular momentum but not exactly angular momentum. We don’t really understand what it is so we call it spin because that’s a close enough analogy to let us reason things out about it.

I don’t understand enough about quantum fields in general or the Higgs field in particular to tell you what the significance of it being a spin-0 scalar field would be.

2

Alarmed_Economics_90 t1_iu16ee2 wrote

Replying to ryschwith (#265,767)

So when I think "field" I imagine a large plane, probably with some sort of grid overlaid. More accurately, I think in my mind the "field" is the grid points themselves.. I can imagine it's n-dimensional as well just fine, of course.

So I just found this definition : "The word ‘field' signifies the variation of a quantity(whether scalar or vector) with position."

I think a spin-0 (spherical symmetry with no preferred axis) field, then, is scalar because if the uniformity of the higgs particles.

I know that's not explaining the significance but did that sound right at all so far?

1

space-ModTeam t1_iu1eb0t wrote

Hello u/MarshyBarsh, your submission "If the Higgs Field can release energy, can it be harnessed?" has been removed from r/space because:

  • Such questions should be asked in the "All space questions" thread stickied at the top of the sub.

Please read the rules in the sidebar and check r/space for duplicate submissions before posting. If you have any questions about this removal please message the r/space moderators. Thank you.

1

ryschwith t1_iu2a54z wrote

Replying to Alarmed_Economics_90 (#266,243)

I don't think that's quite it, although I admit this is at the borders of my understanding of physics. Spin isn't a property of the field, it's a property of the particles generated by the field. It has nothing to do with the field being scalar or not.

1