[HN Gopher] Peter Higgs, physicist who discovered Higgs boson, h...
___________________________________________________________________
Peter Higgs, physicist who discovered Higgs boson, has died
Author : angrygoat
Score : 634 points
Date : 2024-04-09 16:21 UTC (6 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.theguardian.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.theguardian.com)
| hobo_mark wrote:
| He didn't discover the Higgs, but he formulated it (along with
| other people) in 1964. Its discovery was not until 2012.
| empath-nirvana wrote:
| Discovery can happen in a purely mathematical/theoretical
| context, too.
| hbrav wrote:
| I think it's fair to say the 'discovery' that this boson
| exists came with the LHC experiments. But Higgs did discover
| in 1964 that the Higgs boson _could_ explain why particles
| have mass. His paper couldn 't say "this is definitely the
| way the universe is", but rather "if the universe plays by
| the rules we think it does, this is a relatively simple way
| to explain this thing we see".
|
| And in my mind, both of those achievements are awesome.
| zelphirkalt wrote:
| Exactly. Give the countless engineers behind LHC some of
| the credit as well!
| ayakang31415 wrote:
| Precisely, he predicted it.
| hiddencost wrote:
| Glad he got to see the confirmation before he went.
| akumetsu wrote:
| Sad to hear, I remember the excitement over the experimental
| evidence once his particle was detected. I'm always amazed by
| theoretical predictions that can actually be verified plus it was
| interrsting to hear about the higgs boson as part of my studies
| shortly after it was detected. Nowadays it seems many theoretical
| predications are not even close to being verifiable in the coming
| years or with the current and planned tech. Unless we are talking
| about superconductivity at room temperature ofc
| toomuchtodo wrote:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Higgs
| neom wrote:
| Just to add a couple more good Higgs resources courtesy of the
| fine folks at PBS Space Time:
|
| How the Higgs Mechanism Give Things Mass -
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G0Q4UAiKacw
|
| Could the Higgs Boson Lead Us to Dark Matter? -
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z2yLMY6Mpw8
|
| Where Is The Center of The Universe? -
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BOLHtIWLkHg
|
| (For me personally, I gave a massive sad sign when I saw this
| on the homepage. I really liked him a lot for a few reasons: He
| did his thinking in isolation, for a long period of time
| walking around the Scottish highlands . He was a keen disciple
| of interdisciplinary thought being pivotal to innovation. He
| appears to have imagined things and thought about things in a
| pretty weird way for his time, although that might seem
| obvious, how well he grappled with the reality of weirdness is
| exemplary. hing)
| dotnet00 wrote:
| The story of how Higgs predicted his mechanism was part of what
| got me into physics as a kid. It fit 10 year old me's obsession
| with the 'soft-spoken genius' archetype perfectly and formed a
| pillar in my belief that 'genius' was made through hard work (and
| some amount of luck) rather than being born with it.
|
| The announcement of the detection at the LHC is a core memory of
| mine, I still distinctly remember where I was, what I was doing
| and very excitedly trying to explain how cool it was to my
| parents at the time.
| KingFelix wrote:
| That is awesome, we need some more amazing scientists in the
| public eye to inspire the young. I know there are a lot of
| amazing scientists, but somehow need to get them on tiktok or
| something? Can you share the story?
| moelf wrote:
| Specific to Particle physics and Peter Higgs, this book
| (https://www.basicbooks.com/titles/frank-
| close/elusive/978166...) by Frank Close is fantastic.
| dotnet00 wrote:
| My parents had a hard time explaining my dad's job to me, so
| they just told me he was a scientist because he had a masters
| in physics (he was a diplomat). Like any little kid, my
| parents were my heroes, so of course this led me to becoming
| obsessed with scientists and reading up on science stuff, eg
| trying to read my sister's university textbooks.
|
| I developed a hobby of reading up on and sharing factoids I
| found online, and found one about the 'god particle'. At
| first I thought it was cool because it seemed to basically
| talk about a particle that causes mass (of course, this was
| actually wrong, but that didn't really matter to a 10 year
| old), but reading about how it was predicted 40-50 years ago
| and the largest single machine humanity had built was being
| used to try to find it made it my favorite factoid and I'd
| excitedly start talking all about it the moment anyone showed
| even the slightest bit of interest.
|
| In 2012 when the detection was announced, we were on a short
| 2-3 day vacation in Dubai and were having breakfast in the
| hotel. The TV was right next to us, and seeing the news I was
| trying (and failing) to explain to my parents how the Higgs
| boson had been predicted 50 years ago and it took that long
| for the technology to finally catch up to be able to verify
| it, and how this would represent one of the last remaining
| pieces of the standard model (although back then I didn't
| quite grasp that the standard model was not a full theory of
| everything). I was trying to explain to them the size of the
| LHC, how it was the biggest single machine we've built, how
| when they were turning it on for the first time, there were
| fears about it creating micro-black holes which might swallow
| the Earth.
|
| I think that while we need scientists in the public eye, we
| don't need them as social media entertainers, a lot of well
| known science communicators on social media come off as
| attention-seeking charismatic fakes/frauds to me (eg NDT).
| Stuff like the interviews and documentaries Stephen Hawking
| had appeared in (or to a lesser extent, the ones Michio Kaku
| has appeared in) did much more for me in being inspired, even
| without having known what research they were known for.
|
| I think we could also do with more books like Hawking's 'A
| Brief History of Time' and encouraging kids to read them.
| Also, instead of over-simplifying everything and passing off
| scientists as geniuses in the traditional sense, we should be
| more open in showing that the people who made these
| discoveries or predictions were not inherently born with it,
| the vast majority of them were completely normal people who
| worked very hard to build skills in the thing they enjoyed.
|
| Another discovery I feel was somewhat similar is that of
| discrete time crystals, casually predicted in 2012, turned
| out to actually be possible in 2018 and has a similar 'cool'
| factor.
| sonofaragorn wrote:
| I get your sentiment, but I think it's important for
| science communication to adapt to the times. Decades ago
| (and even as little as one decade ago), most scientists
| (maybe Hawking being the exception) who would dare appear
| in these 1hr documentaries would be belittled by the
| "hardcore" scientists with the same words you used "Science
| should not be over-simplified like that", "they are not
| real scientists, they just want to be on TV", etc.
|
| The truth is that young people are mostly on TikTok et al,
| so this type of content needs to get there.
| dotnet00 wrote:
| Yeah that's a fair point. As an early career scientist
| myself now and as someone not that interested in current
| social media trends, I certainly do risk being in the
| same spot as those 'hardcore' scientists.
| mercacona wrote:
| Won't say that TikTok audience is a pound where you'll
| find future scientists. I'll invest on promoting
| alternative spaces both virtual and local best.
| tunesmith wrote:
| Great story! Thanks.
| cge wrote:
| I think a difficulty with science communication is that it
| is very rare to have someone who is both a great scientist
| and great science communicator, and even with the ability,
| it is difficult for them to devote enough time and focus to
| be great at both. Feynman was, if flawed in some ways as a
| communicator. Hawking was, but I got the sense that at some
| point later in his life his focus on communication to the
| public limited his ability to continue doing research
| rigorously (after somewhat idolizing him as a child, as a
| graduate student I went to a research talk he gave to the
| theory side of our department, possibly in the context of
| TAPIR, that was both embarrassing and depressing, as it
| both felt like he really wanted to keep doing good research
| and very clearly couldn't manage to, and it seemed like
| everyone in the room knew it, including him). Einstein,
| despite having the ability to draw a public audience,
| arguably wasn't a great communicator.
|
| On the other side, while yes, NDT is problematic, I think
| there is a value to people who are great science
| communicators without being great scientists. Sagan was
| arguably a great science communicator and not a great
| scientist per se. But his communication to the public was
| inspiring and educational, with enough rigor but not too
| much complexity, with a sense of wonder but not too far
| into speculation presented as science, with intuitive
| explanations but without too disastrously overburdened
| metaphors. There's the view that his talent for
| communication and broad intuitive understanding was such
| that even his contributions to research came primarily from
| his ability to be, in Kuiper's words about him, a "liaison
| between sciences". But even when just to the public,
| someone devoted to that sort of work, and good at it, is
| not less valuable than a scientist.
| moomin wrote:
| There are definitely science communicators who _are_
| committed to getting it right. Dr Brian Cox and Bill Nye
| strike me as good examples. The late Patrick Moore was
| another.
|
| NDT, embarrassingly, often is just plain wrong. He treats
| "science" as a side, not an investigation into the wonder
| of the natural world.
| cdelsolar wrote:
| how is ndt a fake/fraud?
| selimthegrim wrote:
| He switched PhD programs from Texas to Columbia and some
| people thought he took too long or something
| queuebert wrote:
| Normally PhD programs have a timeline of progress. If you
| don't make regular progress toward those very generous
| deadlines, you are kicked out.
|
| Neil did not make sufficient progress at Texas. Then he
| did something weird, where he wasn't ready to defend yet
| got a postdoc at (iirc) Princeton. Princeton had to
| rescind the offer because you (ahem) need a doctorate to
| be post doctorate. Then he got into Columbia's program
| and finally finished.
|
| He had a lot of hobbies and interests other than
| astronomy, and he is actually a very smart guy, but it
| took him a bit longer to get his shit together. I think
| he's found his calling and is quite good at he does.
| dotnet00 wrote:
| He gives me a similar feeling to say, SBF did prior to
| the FTX collapse. This isn't to say he's a scammer like
| SBF, but rather that he has a similar hard to describe
| 'dishonest' air around him, where I feel he's
| deliberately trying to make himself seem smarter than he
| is for the sake of the attention alone, which makes me
| distrustful of him. I'm not really sure how to describe
| the feeling besides "attention-seeking charismatic
| fakes/frauds", but as another example, Bill Nye also
| gives me the same feeling.
|
| His X shenanigans don't help either, where he has a
| reputation of engagement farming by posting dumb somewhat
| condescending "but akschually" type comments on things
| people are enjoying. Eg, when the last American total
| solar eclipse happened in 2017, he posted something along
| the lines of "ignore people when they tell you eclipses
| are rare", it's technically correct that eclipses happen
| fairly often, but he obviously had to know that what
| makes them exciting is that they're rare for the location
| the viewers are at. It's become somewhat of a meme to
| call someone NDT when they're being a buzzkill.
| wpietri wrote:
| Some of the concerns are documented here:
| https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Neil_deGrasse_Tyson
| wolverine876 wrote:
| > My parents had a hard time explaining my dad's job to me,
| so they just told me he was a scientist because he had a
| masters in physics (he was a diplomat).
|
| I'm just curious about when you found out what he really
| did, and if you had known earlier if you would have been a
| diplomat today rather than a scientist.
| dotnet00 wrote:
| I was able to understand it roughly around when I entered
| my teens, in part because he was transferred to another
| country, where the embassy was a lot smaller and the
| country more insular, so it was common to get kids
| involved in embassy stuff to get the otherwise lacking
| sense of community.
|
| It's hard to say if I would've been a diplomat if I had
| known earlier. I feel like being a diplomat is harder to
| innocently romanticize and turn into hobbies for a child
| in the way that 'scientist' can be.
| moelf wrote:
| Same, same, and same, + currently working on one of the LHC
| detectors as a phd student -- but it can all be traced back to
| the lore of the golden age of particle physics and the
| discovery of Brout-Englert-Higgs boson in 2012.
| lapetitejort wrote:
| Some of my professors during my physics BS worked with the LHC
| during the mad scramble to find the particle. I remember people
| saying tongue in cheek "The Higgs particle doesn't exist, but
| it's inside this energy range."
| lupire wrote:
| What makes you think he wasn't born with it?
|
| I can see in own kids that each one is built differently, with
| different inmate propensities despite similar environment.
| layer8 wrote:
| Some have higher inmate propensities than others. ;)
| dotnet00 wrote:
| Most childhood prodigies don't end up being all that
| different from the average person as an adult, and of course
| no one's born with the knowledge of some revolutionary
| discovery in their head.
|
| While all of us have things we find easier to do than the
| average person, short of a literal mental disability, we can
| build up skills in things we are not good at through
| practice. I used to barely pass in math class and didn't even
| understand the concept of negative numbers until 8th grade. A
| year of practicing daily for 2 hours after school, and my
| fundamentals had gotten good enough that I unknowingly
| derived a calculus-based solution to some problems I was
| stuck at, 2 grade levels before when I'd actually start
| learning calculus and got to skip a year as a result.
|
| Similarly, I've been teaching myself to draw despite having
| been pretty terrible at it and discovering how 'deliberate'
| most professional artists have to be with practice and
| building skills.
|
| I think it's pretty common for people to write off their
| inability to do something as just a lack of innate ability,
| when it's really just that no one really sees the struggle
| anyone famous for their work/skill has gone through to get
| there.
| tgv wrote:
| But there definitely is a wide variation in peak
| capability. I have been playing keyboard instruments almost
| my whole life, and while I can play relatively complex
| pieces, I've never gotten at the level of professional
| musicians, let alone the greats. It's true they wouldn't
| have gotten where they are without practicing, but
| practicing is just not enough.
| dotnet00 wrote:
| But has the goal you've been aggressively working towards
| been to reach those levels? or have you been playing just
| for the enjoyment of playing?
|
| Not to suggest that the latter is wrong, just interested
| in your actual goal. In teaching myself to draw (anime
| art specifically), I'm aiming to reach a professional
| level, but am not interested in becoming a professional
| artist. The only factor I've felt would limit my ability
| to achieve this is time commitment (since research is
| pretty time consuming already). I'm not interested in
| committing as fully to it as someone who makes their
| living off art, so I don't expect to match them in all
| ways. So, for instance, while I expect to eventually be
| able to match in terms of overall result, I expect to not
| be anywhere near as fast as a professional can be.
| wholinator2 wrote:
| Well you probably don't practice at much as they do.
| wpietri wrote:
| I think the point is that if one aspires to be a figure like
| Higgs, one can't just coast on "innate propensities". It
| requires fiendishly hard work.
|
| That really resonates with me. When I was a kid I got
| complimented a lot for being smart, especially when I did
| something quickly and easily. This trained me pretty well in
| _seeming_ smart, but really discouraged me from things that
| required hard work or persistence through failure. It took me
| _years_ to get over that.
| wumeow wrote:
| People with innate ability almost always take it for granted.
| rmbyrro wrote:
| With a layperson in mind, curious about physics, do you
| recommend any resource (hopefully not too math-intensive) to
| learn how the higgs boson actually "gives mass" to stuff?
| tekla wrote:
| https://www.amazon.com/Massive-Missing-Particle-Sparked-
| Grea...
| dotnet00 wrote:
| Since you said 'not too math-intensive', I figure you're fine
| with getting more details and background than usual just
| without having to parse equations, in which case PBS Space
| Time is great: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G0Q4UAiKacw
| MathMonkeyMan wrote:
| Sean Carroll's pandemic era youtube series "The Biggest Ideas
| in the Universe"[1] goes into scalar fields and some gauge
| theory, but I don't remember if he covers the Higgs
| mechanism. Might be in one of the Q&A videos.
|
| [1]: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLrxfgDEc2NxZJcWcr
| xH3j...
| cm2187 wrote:
| Did you succeed with your parents? It's hard to be excited
| about theoretical physics as a layman. It has been a long time
| since any of those theories had any practical application.
| dotnet00 wrote:
| They still aren't all that interested in this stuff, and on
| their advice I ended up studying computer engineering instead
| of physics, but I've still found myself working at one of the
| other labs with big particle accelerators, as a researcher
| who can link the computing side with enough of the physics
| side to work with physicists.
|
| They don't fully understand what I do and don't really care
| too much about the details, but when they saw pictures of
| where I worked, they did immediately bring up that I used to
| go on and on about something that seemed similar, so they at
| least did understand what I liked.
|
| I guess the closest they get to being interested in
| theoretical physics is that my Dad, having run through his
| stash of novels during covid, eventually read my left-behind
| copy of A Brief History of Time, and occasionally quotes it
| when he's in the mood to wax philosophical. My Mom instead
| tries to keep up with my other interest of space
| exploration/astronomy.
| wolverine876 wrote:
| > It has been a long time since any of those theories had any
| practical application.
|
| That's a cliche, not why people are ignorant of science (if
| it's even true, which it's not), IMHO.
|
| When you kiss your spouse or watch a sporting event or (go
| bird watching / play D&D / play your trumpet / <your hobby>),
| does it have a pratical application? Practical applications
| tend to be kind of boring, actually.
|
| If you can't get excited about the fundamental laws of nature
| and a person's actual discovery of one - the reason for mass
| (such an incredible concept that it would be absurd to say if
| it wasn't true) - then the issue isn't partical physics.
|
| For the broader public, I think these things just aren't
| explained well, and now there's the anti-science
| mis/disinformation.
| amelius wrote:
| Can you recommend any physics books that were of value to you
| as a kid and perhaps sparked your interest?
| dotnet00 wrote:
| As a 5-10 year old, the books I remember liking the most were
| on the outer planets, with high quality full page photos of
| the planets and their moons. Closer to photobooks than books
| on the solar system targeted at children. One book was just
| images of the moons, mainly focusing on Saturn, I used to
| just look at the images and admire them even if initially I
| didn't quite understand the details. Most of my physics
| reading came from random sources on the early internet.
|
| As a 12-13 year old, Stephen Hawking's A Brief History of
| Time and The Grand Design were by far my most memorable
| reads, although I already had my developing interest in
| physics by then.
| UncleSlacky wrote:
| Lame claim to fame: Higgs was the PhD supervisor of one of my
| university professors. He told us that Higgs left a message on
| his desk before going hiking one weekend to the effect that he'd
| had a great idea and would tell them all about it when he got
| back.
| ColinWright wrote:
| I wonder if he got the idea from Hardy, who before undertaking
| a journey on a very small boat sent a postcard saying he had
| proved the Riemann Hypothesis:
|
| _Hardy stayed in Denmark with Bohr until the very end of the
| summer vacation, and when he was obliged to return to England
| to start his lectures there was only a very small boat
| available.... The North Sea can be pretty rough, and the
| probability that such a small boat would sink was not exactly
| zero. Still, Hardy took the boat, but sent a postcard to Bohr:
| "I proved the Riemann Hypothesis. G.H. Hardy." If the boat
| sinks and Hardy drowns, everybody must believe that he has
| proved the Riemann Hypothesis. Yet God would not let Hardy have
| such a great honor and so He will not let the boat sink._
|
| -- https://home.cc.umanitoba.ca/~mcleod/Riemann/Hardy.html
| anthony__j wrote:
| haha, that's pretty clever. makes you wonder if fermat was
| doing a similar prank with his margins
| ColinWright wrote:
| It's generally believed that Fermat thought he had a proof,
| but probably almost immediately remembered that not
| everything is a Unique Factorization Domain, so the
| "obvious proof" fails. Then he didn't bother returning to
| correct the error.
|
| So no, probably not.
|
| (+) I should go and learn more about the specifics of this
| to make sure I'm relating it correctly.
|
| _EDIT:_ (++) OK, here 's what I was thinking about:
|
| https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/953462/what-was-
| lam...
|
| _EDIT2:_ (++) Second link with similar details:
|
| https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/324740/fermats-
| proo...
| ducttapecrown wrote:
| I just recently learned that the note in Fermat's margin
| was published posthumously by his son! So Fermat never
| necessarily publicly claimed to have a proof. So I would
| imagine you're absolutely correct.
| robblbobbl wrote:
| Condolences.
| santbo wrote:
| RIP.
|
| Lucky who is born in an English-speaking country with a short
| name easy to remember by other English monolinguals. The "Higgs
| boson" has many fathers, but his name got attached to the concept
| for simplicity, giving him world fame and, ultimately, a Nobel
| prize when he likely didn't contribute significantly more than
| others, cf. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Higgs_boson#History
| or
| https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nobel_Prize_controversies#Ph...
| vazma wrote:
| I was incredibly fortunate to meet him at CERN the day before the
| Higgs boson announcement. As an intern, I encountered him the
| evening prior; he was dining alone in the CERN cafeteria,
| blending in like a kindly elderly gentleman. He was exceptionally
| humble and courteous. I feel so lucky that I mustered the courage
| to speak with him and shake his hand. Rest in peace, Mr. Higgs.
| CapeTheory wrote:
| Massive in his field.
| callumw13 wrote:
| this is the kind of strong interaction I like to see on this
| website
| jszymborski wrote:
| This has given me a case of the Higgs boson blues
|
| https://youtu.be/1GWsdqCYvgw
| jaredwiener wrote:
| But will there be a funeral mass?
| pfdietz wrote:
| It was a success for particle physics that they found the Higgs,
| but it was also a tragedy. Discovering the Higgs and nothing else
| new was the nightmare scenario for the LHC, and so it has come to
| pass.
| joshcryer wrote:
| It really damaged string theory which is by far the greatest
| thing to happen with the LHC.
| pfdietz wrote:
| Ah, a glass is half full person! :)
| silverfrost wrote:
| Proposed - not discovered. He put it forward as an explanation,
| he didn't make the actual discovery.
| taylorbuley wrote:
| BBC version https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-68774195
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2024-04-09 23:00 UTC)