Higgs boson Q&A
The discovery of the Higgs boson stuffed in a lacking piece of the usual mannequin of particle physics, which describes matter and its interactions. A decade later, physicists proceed to probe the particle for clues to among the universe’s greatest questions, Emily Conover reported in “The Higgs boson at 10” (SN: 7/2/22, p. 18).
Conover’s story of the Higgs boson thrilled physics fans, inspiring many feedback and questions. In the piece, she defined {that a} Higgs boson is a wave within the Higgs discipline, an invisible property that pervades the cosmos. When elementary particles work together with the sphere, they achieve mass. More large particles work together extra strongly with the sphere. Reader Lewis Holcombe wished to know if elementary particles have zero mass earlier than they work together with the sphere.
That’s precisely the concept, Conover says. “In the early moments of the universe, before the Higgs field ‘turned on,’ all the fundamental particles were massless,” she says. “But the standard model doesn’t explain why different particles interact with the Higgs field by the amounts they do, and thus have the masses we measure.”
Since the Higgs discipline imparts mass, reader Paul Leonard puzzled if the sphere is also accountable for gravity.
The Higgs discipline isn’t accountable for gravity, Conover says. Although mass and gravity are associated, they’re completely different ideas. “Gravity is not part of the standard model,” she says. “We don’t have a working theory of gravity at the particle physics level yet.”
In the usual mannequin, forces are transmitted by particles. Scientists suppose that there exists one other particle, not included in the usual mannequin, referred to as a graviton, which transmits gravity, Conover says. If it exists, the graviton is anticipated to be a massless particle with no electrical cost. But will probably be extraordinarily troublesome to seek out, she says, as a result of gravity could be very weak in contrast with the usual mannequin forces: electromagnetism, the weak power and the robust power.
Reader Brad Ruben puzzled about different commonplace mannequin particles: quarks. A high quark is about as heavy as a gold atom. That giant mass is mirrored in measurements of the particle’s interactions with the Higgs discipline, Conover reported. Since quarks make up protons and neutrons, that are the constructing blocks of atoms, Ruben requested how a single quark can weigh as a lot as an atom.
The high quark’s mass is not any contradiction, Conover says. According to the best picture of protons’ and neutrons’ innards, the particles don’t include high quarks. Protons are made up of two up quarks and one down quark, whereas neutrons have two down quarks and one up quark, she says. A better look reveals a extra complicated picture. “For instance, inside the proton, there are not only quarks, but also gluons. These are massless particles that carry the strong force, which ‘glues’ the quarks together,” Conover says. “There is also a ‘sea’ of various types of quarks and antiquarks that last only for brief instants in the proton.” The energies and different refined properties of those subatomic particles all contribute to the mass of the proton.
Tech takes time
Lightweight subatomic particles referred to as neutrinos might assist monitor nuclear submarines to make sure that the uranium-rich gas many use isn’t weaponized, Emily Conover reported in “Neutrinos could spy nuclear rogues” (SN: 7/2/22, p. 12).
Reader John Oxman requested how helpful this monitoring know-how could be, contemplating all nations that at the moment have nuclear submarines already possess nuclear weapons. Non-nuclear weapon states might get nuclear submarines sooner or later, Conover says. For instance, Australia is about to amass such subs with the assistance of the United States and the United Kingdom. “Even if the need for this type of monitoring is not immediate, the process of implementing and perfecting monitoring technologies, especially a new type that uses neutrinos, is very lengthy,” she says. “For such a technology to be useful, researchers have to anticipate the need well in advance.”
