It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Higgs Field

page: 1
<<   2 >>

log in


posted on Nov, 26 2014 @ 05:01 PM
Just seen a show with Prof Brian Cox.

He said that mass is dependent upon the Higgs field.

Can someone who knows more explain to me. If we could shield ourselves from the Higgs field, would that make FTL possible?

posted on Nov, 26 2014 @ 05:04 PM
a reply to: glennellis23

No, even massless photons cannot travel faster than light.

posted on Nov, 26 2014 @ 05:06 PM
a reply to: glennellis23

If you were to shield yourself from the Higgs Field, I think (given my limited knowledge of physics) that you would cease to exist in any detectable form.

posted on Nov, 26 2014 @ 05:14 PM
a reply to: Aleister

What about a bubble of non-Higgs space.

If you have no mass the E=MC2 no longer applies.

If you have no mass then even blowing out the back would produce high velocity.

posted on Nov, 26 2014 @ 05:16 PM
i hate to break it to you but I have read that the higgs field is only responsible for some of the mass of particles with mass. turning off the higgs field will not render anything massless except some special particles.

posted on Nov, 26 2014 @ 05:28 PM
The Klein-Gordon Equation shows us why the Higgs is a delusion. It is predicted by a flawed mathematical instrument as shown by Dirac.

posted on Nov, 26 2014 @ 05:31 PM
If you can make a object massless (make it's mass = 0) then it would take no energy to accelerate it.

It's a popular science fiction idea.

The idea is: if it's mass is 0, then it takes no energy to accelerate, and it's mass does not become infinite at the speed of light, nor does it take a infinite amount of energy to get it to the speed of light. That means (for science fiction writers anyways) that you could go FTL.

The real world doesn't quite work that way however. There would be other things to over come.

The "Higgs Field" would not make an object "massless" in any case.

posted on Nov, 26 2014 @ 06:00 PM
The higgs field is like water. Everything has a drag in water. Tunnafish have a lot less drag then a human has, and can travel faster through it. Imagine Tunna fish to be Hydrogen and man to be Iron.

The only difference is that heavier elements experience more drag. All mass is actually a result from the higgs field, without it we wouldn't be able to tell the difference, or exist for that matter.

Well that's what they said... Personally, this explanation works for me.

posted on Nov, 26 2014 @ 06:41 PM
no not all mass comes from higgs not even most of it. i just read several science articles that clarified that. because i thought higgs was the only culprit behind mass too.

posted on Nov, 26 2014 @ 06:41 PM
Double Post pls delete.
edit on 26-11-2014 by stormbringer1701 because: dp

posted on Nov, 27 2014 @ 02:57 AM

originally posted by: glennellis23
Just seen a show with Prof Brian Cox.

He said that mass is dependent upon the Higgs field.
Your starting premise is wrong. Most of your mass is NOT dependent on the Higgs, as explained here:

Your Mass is NOT From the Higgs

A tiny little bit is from the Higgs, but not much.

This man, Dr White has some unproven speculative ideas on how to we might someday go faster than light, which also have nothing to do with the Higgs, but they are interesting ideas nonetheless:

Faster than Light: Warp Drive - SpaceVision 2013

posted on Nov, 27 2014 @ 06:05 AM
Man this Higgs guy keeps butchering my Thesis.

There is no such thing as mass density causing gravity. Gravity does not exist. It is all magnetic forces.

An object of 0 mass has no magnetic force there for exerts no magnetic force nor is attracted by magnetic force.

it is completely neutral. Why is that? Because the particle alignment is not functioning where as an electron will create rings around a central particle such a proton or neutron causing the mass react through entropy which becomes vibration.

Without any magnetic force such a physical object would be weightless. Because as explained it neither attracts nore repells mass.

Higgs is a doe head anyways, The particle they are looking for is smaller than an atom.

Why is it smaller than an atom? Atoms increase surface area which causes an object to span in size relative to its actual size.

Where as a massless Dense object only formed in black holes would say, Be in comparison the size of a virus particle where an atom would be the size of a human size. Or rather a human to an Ant.

Black energy (When in its dense form as in there is lots of it, it becomes black matter but must be pressurized and contained which is why black holes have the highest ammount of black matter in them and why the rest of the universe is surrounded externally and internally by black energy.

Without this stuff filling the void within an atom. Atoms simply could not rotate. The sub-atomic particles would get to close.

BTW what they are doing with the hadron collider is forging spent particles. Basically all particles have a set ammount of energy and the balence of the subatomic particles stored energy within the particles themselves govern how stable the entirety of the particle is.

Say you smash sub-atomic particles together. That releases a lot of energy, but since is contained within a high powered magnetic feild the particles rapidly recombine.

It does not mean the newly formed particles will be fully charged functioning particles. It's going to be the opposite.

So when these dud particles die on us very quickly what happens to the scientists results? OH we found an anti-particle *rolls eyes*
edit on 27-11-2014 by AnuTyr because: (no reason given)

posted on Nov, 27 2014 @ 06:40 AM
You want me to explain where energy comes from in the first place?

It's not hard to understand. Everyone here knows what plate tectonics is right? When 2 layers of *crust* push on each other it creates friction or pressure. Building up energy.

The universe does this the same way. But it requires pressurization that goes beyond magnetic capabilities.

It has to be so bad that the north and south poles of the shattered particles within the compression point have to be shoved together. Reguardless of what the magnetic orientation would of been. Since the force exterted exceeds the particles resistances.

It creates a massless particle with no magnetic activity. So it seems invisble to us. All physical matter requires a very strict rule of magnetic bonding and seperation. If a particle is except from either, it shall have no mass and only minor interaction* There's lots of it and it gets in the way, which causes limitations such as the speed of light *

Since these particles are not moving, Energy will build up. The built up energy comes from the lodged shards pushing along its *fault lines* Its not until millions billions trillions of years later these particles snape sending super charged sub particles that combine into sub-atomic particles Which combine into an atom as all these objects are flying across the galaxy. At the same time, When the sub-atomic slivers from protons electrons and neutrons are spent. The object may come in and out of existance seemingly. Because it is struggling to hold itself together, as shards are thrown off the rest of the mass chases it. Then it breaks apart and this keeps occuring until the shards are what we consider to be annihlated. When the fact is we only can see objects that have order. Where patterns can be observed. We assume particles cease to exist. it's more or less the mass has spent its stored energy and borders being invisible and visible. If it wasn't for black holes, This stuff would overcrowd the universe until all mass would be just fragments fading in and our of reality.

But since all mass ends up at that state, Then something must be replenishing the loss of energy.
Energy does not come from no where, it comes from somewhere. Mass only = energy depending on the Energy value continued within.

You will never calcium from one side of the planet that is identical to calcium on the other. Nore can you compare one particle to the next, Each particle is like a fingerprint. Humans belong to a species but everyone of our finger prints are unique.

So are the energy values of mass.

However if you are thinking you can get an infinite amount of energy from rapidly combining and and seperating mass you are dreaming.

Even using water, doing it with the same water will make it volitle and radioactive. We may beable to do with for a couple hundred years but the biproducts might be difficult to get rid of.

So is cold fusion going to be answer this hadron collider will give us? Probably not because unless they plan on making a miniture star (Which is along the lines of cold fusion) good luck lol. There are other methods of getting energy.

LIke extracting the most highly charged fragments from black energy and turning it into the particle of choice. But i think the first step for these scientists is figuring out how to create highly charged plasma like that of the sun when a lot of the energy we get here on Earth is second handed from the sun itself.

It's going to be difficult unless we can create some exotic matter to contain it.

The metals and materials we have now might not have the magnetic strengths and weaknesses we need to acomplish such a task.

I guess that's where mining in space comes in.

posted on Nov, 27 2014 @ 06:46 AM

originally posted by: eriktheawful
If you can make a object massless (make it's mass = 0) then it would take no energy to accelerate it.

does that mean anti matter cannot travel?

a reply to: Aleister

Hi Aleister...
are you suggesting that anti matter means non existence?

edit on CST06uThu, 27 Nov 2014 06:47:14 -06004714am330 by Thurisaz because: add reply to

posted on Nov, 27 2014 @ 06:58 AM
a reply to: Thurisaz

Hes saying there is no magnetic resistance. No drag.

if you are flying by particles and half of them are trying to pull you away by slowing you down. You would have mass.

But if you could move without these resistances you would be massless.

Also there would be zero magnetic activity occuring. So no organization like atoms or molecules would occure. The only existance for the 0 mass object would be the space it takes up. Which is a lot of space.

I mean look at space. Look at the beauty of space. How the computer screen isn't pressed against my face and the universe isn't trying to crush me into one object is a beautiful thing. This space thing is rather fabulous.
edit on 27-11-2014 by AnuTyr because: (no reason given)

posted on Nov, 27 2014 @ 07:03 AM
a reply to: AnuTyr

I wish I could give you an applause for your contribution. Your very smart.

Back on Topic... How then can black holes be explained? Seems to throw a spanner in the Higgs Theory.

posted on Nov, 27 2014 @ 07:12 AM
The Higgs particle was discovered, using a yogic siddhi called "anima", in 1959 - five years before Peter Higgs proposed its existence. See news item #9 here.

If you are still in doubt, read chapter 9 of "Extra-sensory Perception of Quarks", downloadable as a free PDF here. The transcripts of the experiments conducted by a New Zealand psychiatrist are available to the public in the archives of the National Library of Australia.

posted on Nov, 27 2014 @ 08:42 AM
a reply to: Thurisaz

Black holes are caused by movement and torrent you can call it that way. Because all the decaying matter floating in space is drawn towards a central point. These central points are called black holes. They form because it is a constant implosion.

It is like a giant microwave put it that way. It zaps and crushes everything inside of it until it cannot zap or crush anymore.

You can't put metal in a microwave because there is hardly any humidity or *hydrogen* inside of metal.

It's the presence of Hydrogren and oxygen that allows foods to be warmed up. You cannot warm up dry food in the microwave.

basically the forces of a black hole are strong enough to rip apart the guts of even sub-atomic particles.

Sub-atomic particles are bonded together by even tinier fragments that strickly bond together with magnetic frequencies.
Basically A lot of metal is magnetic because of its linar path the atoms follow. For a magnet it is more refined. But metal is already very close to being a magnet but of course not all metal is magnetic to typical magnets. That does not mean that copper and other non magnetized metals cannot become magnetic as well because even these metals hold charges, Those they are more suited to carry charges rather than hold them which is why we use copper as a conductor because it channels the electrons from one side to the other but being still physical matter like any typical atom it will have its own magnetic counter parts.

Frequencies can be adjusted this is how things like paper can even carry a current. It just has to *resonate*

Anyways back to how black holes are formed.

The greater black holes or the central black holes are formed out of what we would call space.

Basically black energy will continue to exaust fresh particles constantly. So what happens is all this mass ends up pooling together into a giant ball until that ball explodes, When that ball explodes it creates a nova, Which results in a black hole. Of course the nova is the span on a galaxy. because this is where a new galaxy will be formed.

Stars can nova as well but they need the proper diameter in order to feed on enough decaying matter in order to remain open.

It's all based on how much it feeds, If a black hole stops gaining mass to devour then the black hole will cease to exist. So as long as decaying matter is being fed to it, which will happen given stars shoot of a lot of decaying material as well as material decaying on its own without nuclear fusion.

Black holes are very unlikely to sustain themselves on solar systems and physical debris because the time scale between objects being drawn in as well as the ammount needed to remain open would very to much. So black holes are drawing in all the invisible/visible spent mass the surrounding matter is spewing out.

Much of this activity can be heard through radio-telescopes aka Sattelite dishes as microwave feedback coming from the center of the galaxy.

posted on Nov, 27 2014 @ 08:56 AM
In order for this process to work, The Universe would of never had a begining in the first place.

Mass has just been shifting from its contained energy conserving and charging state, Where upon being fully charged moves to release that pent up energy.

This is why using a ton or 2 of nuclear weaponized material will have such a large blast radius. All that pent up energy was from being held and bound together for so long.

That's why energy is so explosive and why mass can exist for so long before it becomes depleted.

Can you think of any other way to cram in energy that lasts billions of years without having it compressed for trillions of years?

You might be asking, How can matter exist if it's compressed for an addtional third of the time needed? Easy. The universe is over 80% black matter and energy.

So on that ratio, That is why space is so large. But that still dosn't stop the particles that have been hanging around for trillions of years from exausting. Even when new black energy/dark matter is being made, Matter is constantly being replaced.
edit on 27-11-2014 by AnuTyr because: (no reason given)

posted on Nov, 27 2014 @ 09:06 AM

originally posted by: micpsi
The Higgs particle was discovered, using a yogic siddhi called "anima", in 1959 - five years before Peter Higgs proposed its existence. See news item #9 here.

If you are still in doubt, read chapter 9 of "Extra-sensory Perception of Quarks", downloadable as a free PDF here. The transcripts of the experiments conducted by a New Zealand psychiatrist are available to the public in the archives of the National Library of Australia.

Because a yogi has more credibility when discussing physics than you know physicists right?

What's with the rejection of specialized study trend?

Do people like you go to mechanics when you have a health problem?

top topics

<<   2 >>

log in