Originally posted by AceWombat04
I think the "abhorrent to nature" line may simply be poetic license on the part of the article's author. What the physicist in question may be
hypothesizing (if indeed he isn't just joking,) is that some effect resulting from the creation of the particle is traveling back through time
briefly to disrupt our ability to detect the particle.
Just a guess, though.
I once had a theory that if the universe ever ceased to exist, meaning the end of space-time, that we would not be here in the present to think about
it or discuss it. That if time ever stopped, that time would also not exist now, in the present. The fact that we are here, experiencing space-time
means that it will not abruptly cease to be in the future. This stemmed from the idea that time is an illusion, and that all moments are actually one
singular moment, expressed laterally.
If that were the case, and if it were also true that birthing the primordial Higgs particle into our current universe would upset & destroy
space-time, then it is impossible for us to discover the Higgs. If finding it would mean we would cease to exist in the
past, present and
future, then by process of elimination the only version of reality we could exist in now would be the one where we
never discover the
Higgs.
In other words, our very existence give us a probability of 1 out of 1 that we exist in a non-Higgs timeline. Any other timeline would be 100%
inaccessible to us. This is the same as saying that there is a 1 out of 1 chance that you exist in a timeline in which you did not die at birth. Just
looking at it from the other direction, as
Feynman Diagrams work in both directions.