Active Users:177 Time:18/05/2024 04:43:02 PM
Back to Messageboard Post New Thread Search Help Stats Rules
Re: Not quite. Dreaded Anomaly Send a noteboard - 17/06/2010 12:45:06 AM
The EM and strong forces have no Higgs couplings, as their carrier particles (photons and gluons) are massless. There's no proposal of any Higgs with a color charge as far as I'm aware, and definitely not in a SUSY model.

Ah, I see. So are you saying that the Higgs 'clings' to the bosons of a force (in our case, the Weak)? I suppose if it only couples to the Weak, there would certainly be no colour charge.


In a way. The Higgs mechanism was originally developed to explain the masses of the W and Z bosons, and has since been extended to explain the fundamental fermion masses as well (leptons and quarks). It's not so much that the Higgs only couples to the weak force, but that the weak carrier bosons are the only bosons that couple to the Higgs.

One Higgs doublet is actually four particles, three of which get "eaten" by the W+, W-, and Z bosons to generate their masses. (In technical terms, they're Goldstone bosons which provide the longitudinal polarization component; compare with the photon, which is massless and has no longitudinal polarization.) The fourth is what we generally think of as the actual "Higgs boson." If there were two doublets, that pattern would be repeated, so in addition to h, we'd have H+, H-, H, and A. (The A is a bit confusing given that A is usually used for photons in electroweak unification, but that's the convention.)

I'm slightly confused by what you're trying to say here; I follow what you say about the W and Z bosons and then about the actual "Higgs boson", but that only accounts for four Higgs particles. Where does the fifth come in to play?


Perhaps I wasn't clear. The Standard Model doublet consists of the three that get eaten, and the Higgs h. In the theoretical SUSY two-doublet model, a second doublet is added, which consists of H+, H-, H, and A. None of those are eaten, so that brings the total to 5.

I'm at Fermilab this summer (working on CMS, though) and there is definitely a sense of rivalry. The Tevatron can no longer claim the highest energy, but this has just shifted everyone's bragging to focus on luminosity, where it still dominates.

I've always been disappointed that my undergrad was completely missing a particle module. I'm finishing my masters now and I kind of crammed as much particle physics as I could into the year, so I think my knowledge in this area is rushed at best! :P


You could pick up Griffiths' Introduction to Elementary Particles if you want to learn more on your own. He does a good job with most of the Standard Model stuff, but there's not too much on beyond-SM topics (such as the supersymmetric concept we're discussing in this thread).
Reply to message
US experiment hints at 'multiple God particles' everynametaken - 15/06/2010 04:04:14 AM 697 Views
Gher - 15/06/2010 04:11:11 AM 341 Views
I minored in modern physics, which means, I have enough knowledge to be..... trzaska2000 - 15/06/2010 04:45:35 AM 330 Views
this has always bothered me about particle physicists.... moondog - 15/06/2010 05:32:26 AM 350 Views
Down with particle-of-the-gaps thinking! Ghavrel - 15/06/2010 05:38:20 AM 340 Views
Yeah, always been my problem, too. Joel - 15/06/2010 05:44:30 AM 292 Views
Lederman wanted to call it "the goddamn particle," but the publisher wouldn't let him. Dreaded Anomaly - 15/06/2010 06:26:56 AM 314 Views
Well, we've been pretty bad at name stuff Isaac - 15/06/2010 08:52:09 AM 320 Views
"Giant radiating dyke swarms"?!!! Joel - 15/06/2010 05:57:11 PM 317 Views
Oh, yes, and it's often accompanied by Dickite Isaac - 15/06/2010 06:18:35 PM 308 Views
When giant radiating dike swarms get hot they produce dickite? Joel - 16/06/2010 12:35:53 AM 336 Views
This I can believe. Joel - 15/06/2010 06:02:37 PM 260 Views
It's more than a few right answers. Dreaded Anomaly - 15/06/2010 06:26:35 AM 438 Views
did you go to school in wisconsin? cause you sound just like that guy moondog - 15/06/2010 07:07:49 AM 297 Views
Yet, when determining the measure for what a planet is, Pluto vanished from the list! Birdeye - 15/06/2010 07:14:28 AM 328 Views
right, but it's still out there in the same orbit with the same momentum and positioning moondog - 15/06/2010 08:45:43 AM 418 Views
It had to lose its status or you'd have to memorize several more planets Isaac - 15/06/2010 08:57:20 AM 352 Views
y'all are screwing up my "uncertainty principle" joke dammit! *NM* moondog - 15/06/2010 09:19:11 AM 136 Views
Sorry Totally missed it *NM* Isaac - 15/06/2010 09:45:23 AM 185 Views
I was disappointed they didn't make all the dwarf planets into planet planets. Darth_Katie - 16/06/2010 01:00:51 PM 347 Views
As a physicist... Dreaded Anomaly - 15/06/2010 06:13:01 AM 436 Views
Cool. Darth_Katie - 16/06/2010 01:01:34 PM 356 Views
I feel ya! *NM* everynametaken - 17/06/2010 12:18:30 AM 205 Views
As a physicist, I find this quite interesting. jiggy - 16/06/2010 09:08:15 PM 437 Views
Not quite. Dreaded Anomaly - 16/06/2010 09:57:18 PM 422 Views
Re: Not quite. jiggy - 16/06/2010 10:22:14 PM 433 Views
Nerds! everynametaken - 17/06/2010 12:19:57 AM 260 Views
Re: Not quite. Dreaded Anomaly - 17/06/2010 12:45:06 AM 490 Views
Re: Not quite. jiggy - 17/06/2010 08:23:10 AM 415 Views
Eight minus three is five Floffe - 17/06/2010 09:19:46 AM 237 Views
Back to Messageboard Post New Thread Search Help Stats Rules

Reply to Message

Block Quote Paragraph Quote
Formatting
Smiley Codes