

What Is the Higgs? - cryptoz
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2013/10/08/science/the-higgs-boson.html#/?g=true&higgs1_slide=0

======
gus_massa
Previous discussion:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6514107](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6514107)
(141 points, 550 days, 18 comments)

I'll copy part of the first two comment:

> _I really hate this molasses explanation of the Higgs field. The problem is,
> it is wrong, suggests a wrong intuition and obstructs actually interesting
> physics. It is wrong, because the mass is something very different from
> friction. It suggests a wrong intuition, because the snow field, or the
> molasses, generates a force when something is moving through the medium. But
> there is no medium to move through. ( And mass acts, when there is a change
> of velocity, friction if there is velocity.)_ [...]

> [Me] _I agree. I hate the molasses explanation, because it suggests the
> wrong kind of equations. Higgs bosons don’t dissipate energy. Repeat after
> me: “The Higgs mechanism is totally unrelated to viscosity or friction”_
> [...]

I still hate this analogy.

~~~
ssivark
As far as analogies in popular science go, it is a very good one. Of course
the equations might be different because of slightly different contexts, but
most people you're giving the analogy to are not going to every calculate the
details. I think it is intuitive and gets you quite far in being able to
explain the Higgs mechanism.

That said, I do agree that it would be nice to focus on added inertia, which
people might have some crude intuition for. FWIW, I would explain it this way:
[http://dickfeynman.github.io/blog/writings/physics/higgs-
for...](http://dickfeynman.github.io/blog/writings/physics/higgs-for-
laypeople/)

Also, I disagree that there is no medium to move through. The Higgs field
background (and "vacuum" as such might well be considered a medium) and that's
perfectly correct.

~~~
gus_massa
The problem with viscosity is that it makes you stop. If you are in a car and
stop the engine, the air and tires drag will make you stop, a lot of snow will
make you stop. Viscosity stop things, because it's related to the speed and
makes the speed smaller until you stop. Perhaps not everyone can write the
equation, but there are some underlying properties of the possible equations
there. The important part is that if you draw speed vs time you get

    
    
      s|--\
       |   \----\
       |         \-------\
       |                  \-----------\
       |                               \--------
      -+----------------------------------------
       |                                t
    

The Higgs / mass don't make you stop. They try to make you go at a constant
speed. The equation is more difficult because it's a second order equation,
but is more simple because it has less constants. The important part is that
if you draw speed vs time you get

    
    
      s|
       |----------------------------------------
       |
       |
       |
      -+----------------------------------------
       |                                t
    

Let's try to discuss another example: in a car we can measure the top speed
and the 0-60mph time.

The viscosity reduce the top speed, because when you go fast it increase the
drag and makes you go slower and when you turn out the engine the car begin to
slow down. More air viscosity makes your car stop in less time.

The mass of the car changes the acceleration, the 0-60 mph time. When the car
is stopped, more mass makes more difficult to change the speed from 0 and
reach 60mph. When you go at 60mph the mass is not so important, until you try
to turn or stop. More mass make your car stop in more time.

~~~
ssivark
In your speed vs time graph, you show speed decreasing exponentially. A mass
term in a field theory does something very similar -- it cause correlations
between (quantum) fluctuations to drop exponentially with distance. While you
might imagine that a particle with some velocity doesn't "lose velocity", the
probability of it getting to some place damps out exponentially, where the
decay length/time scale is set by the mass. For example, check this:
<[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_gap#Mathematical_definitio...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_gap#Mathematical_definitions>)

------
kisstheblade
I thought that photons are also affected by gravity even though they have no
mass?

[http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2013/10/08/science/the-
hi...](http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2013/10/08/science/the-higgs-
boson.html#/?g=true&higgs1_slide=16)

~~~
baq
nowhere in the article there is any mention of gravity. mass is 'just' a form
of energy and photons definitely have energy; in general relativity, that's
enough. we don't have an accepted theory that works on quantum scales.

~~~
kisstheblade
Ok so if I understand your and mdturnerphys answer correctly, photons are not
affected by the higgs field (but are affected by gravity, hence the mystery)?

~~~
baq
i guess it's a fair statement.

