- Apr 2017
-
iopscience.iop.org iopscience.iop.org
-
In 2013, François Englert and Peter Higgs were awarded the Nobel Prize in Physics for the development of the Higgs mechanism.
'The Nobel Prize in Physics 2013 was awarded jointly to François Englert and Peter W. Higgs "for the theoretical discovery of a mechanism that contributes to our understanding of the origin of mass of subatomic particles, and which recently was confirmed through the discovery of the predicted fundamental particle, by the ATLAS and CMS experiments at CERN's Large Hadron Collider"'
– https://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/2013/
-
It is encoded in a compact description, the so-called 'Lagrangian', which even fits on t-shirts and coffee mugs.
And, although the Standard Model may not be written in stone, the compact description certainly is: https://home.cern/cern-people/updates/2013/03/standard-model-set-stone
-
Actually, the addition of \text{h}.\text{c}. is not required for term 2, since term 2 is self-adjoint.
Indeed! See another Quantum Diaries post on it: http://www.quantumdiaries.org/2011/06/26/cern-mug-summarizes-standard-model-but-is-off-by-a-factor-of-2/
But you'll have to talk with John Ellis) about that: http://cds.cern.ch/record/1071200?ln=en
-
we recommend using the term 'transformation' instead of 'decay', as this more accurately describes the physical process
OH MY GOD YES! <3
The term "decay" when applied to non-macro phenomena is terribly misleading for anyone who isn't a physicist.
"Decay" has several meanings (see the Wikipedia page), but it would not be foolish to assume that the term is commonly associated with things like decomposition or biological decays. Even in physics, an orbital decay is a gradual process.
"Transformation" is much more applicable, and is a term I've used myself over the last few years instead of "decay" in this context.
-
where μ and ν are Lorentz indices representing the spacetime components
Look at "Four-vectors": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four-vector
-
Feynman diagrams
"Let’s draw Feynman diagrams!" and more, on the Quantum Diaries blog: http://www.quantumdiaries.org/2010/02/14/lets-draw-feynman-diagams/
EDIT: This is already referenced in the article, but I'll leave this link up as a pointer anyway.
-
quantum field theory
Here's a beautiful (if long) explanation of QFT, on the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/quantum-field-theory/
-
The latest success was the verification of the Brout–Englert–Higgs field by ATLAS and CMS at CERN's Large Hadron Collider in 2012. Both experiments successfully detected the quantised excitation of the BEH field—the so-called Higgs boson.
- ATLAS paper: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physletb.2012.08.020
- CMS paper: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physletb.2012.08.021
- CERN's background pages on the Higgs boson: https://home.cern/topics/higgs-boson
-
the Brout–Englert–Higgs field interacts with particles that have mass (all particles except the gluon and the photon)
Or is it that all particles that interact with the BEH field have mass? ;)
-
Matter particles can be divided into three groups: quarks (q) and antiquarks (\bar{q}); electrically charged leptons (\ell) and antileptons (\bar{\ell}); neutrinos (ν) and antineutrinos (\bar{\nu}). Gluons (g) couple to colour charge, which only quarks, antiquarks, and gluons themselves, have.
Typically, though, the matter particles (fermions) are grouped into two, depending on whether they interact with the colour charge (quarks) or not (leptons, which include both the electrically charged leptons and neutrinos).
However, the division into three groups, as shown here, is helpful!
-