When a free particle move in space with a known momentum and energy then what is the physical process that gives mass to that free (relativistic) particle? What is role does the Higgs field in that process, if any?

mocatgesex 2022-10-08 Answered
When a free particle move in space with a known momentum and energy then what is the physical process that gives mass to that free (relativistic) particle?
What is role does the Higgs field in that process, if any?
You can still ask an expert for help

Expert Community at Your Service

  • Live experts 24/7
  • Questions are typically answered in as fast as 30 minutes
  • Personalized clear answers
Learn more

Solve your problem for the price of one coffee

  • Available 24/7
  • Math expert for every subject
  • Pay only if we can solve it
Ask Question

Answers (2)

Brendan Bradley
Answered 2022-10-09 Author has 11 answers
It should be stated that the mass of any actual thing that you've encountered in life has almost nothing to do with the Higgs. Relativity says that energy and mass are equivalent. This means that if you clump massless particles together with E potential energy, and then put those particles into a box, it will appear that that box has mass E / c 2 .
Neat, but who cares? Well, it turns out that the strong interaction does exactly this, clumping quarks together in boxes we call protons and neutrons. Now, quarks DO get a mass from the Higgs mechanism, but this mass is much, much smaller (roughly 1 / 1000) than their "relativistic mass." So, you would say that you and me, or a rock or a baseball has mass not due to the Higgs mechanism, but rather because all of these things are made mostly of bound quarks.
Did you like this example?
Subscribe for all access
ter3k4w8x
Answered 2022-10-10 Author has 4 answers
I'll focus on the Higgs aspect of this. There is, potentially, a separate issue to your question, in that you may be thinking about "relativistic mass", the energy an object gains as it speeds up. Modern physicists don't use this concept and I'll explain why underneath.
Ignore the all-too-common answers that tell you the Higgs field slows down particles, as if it were a sea of molasses. This suggests that the Higgs field imparts mass by exerting a drag effect on them, and is simply incorrect.
So how does it work? First, consider what is meant by "mass". Whilst you may be used to thinking of mass as a property that determines how much something weighs, or how hard it is to move (it is this latter aspect that the molasses analogy appeals to), Einstein taught us another way to think of it (the way modern physicists use the word): as "rest energy".
Energy is a property of a particle that can come either from moving ("kinetic energy") or from its position in a force field ("potential energy"). Einstein's special relativity revealed that some particles also have another form; an intrinsic amount of energy that is always present, regarldess of where the particle is or how fast it is moving. It is this intrinsic or rest energy that we call mass. (Hence "relativistic mass" is simply the energy gained by speeding up; it is, in other words, just kinetic energy. The word and concept "mass" is best reserved for "rest mass").
We could, if we like, declare that certain particles are born with intrinsic rest energy and leave it there, but for technical reasons this is incompatible with what we know about particle physics, so we are forced to conclude that, intrinsically, all particles are massless, and this rest energy must be given to some of them by something called the Higgs field:
Consider an electric or magnetic field, which emanates from a charged object. Other particles which have an electric charge (or are magnetised) will gain potential energy when they are placed in those respective fields (the amount of energy will depend both on the charge of the particle and the strength of the field). The Higgs field is like an electric field, with one crucial difference: whereas an electric field diminishes in strength the further you get from its source, the Higgs field is constant (and non-zero) throughout space and time. Thus a particle with "Higgs charge" will have the same, constant amount of "Higgs potential energy" wherever it is. This potential energy is, in other words, intrinsic energy, or mass. Larger Higgs-charge leads to larger intrinsic energy = larger mass.
There is, of course, much more to be said on the subject, but that's the essence of how the Higgs field works.
Did you like this example?
Subscribe for all access

Expert Community at Your Service

  • Live experts 24/7
  • Questions are typically answered in as fast as 30 minutes
  • Personalized clear answers
Learn more

You might be interested in

asked 2022-09-16
E = ( t ) 0 ( m ) 1 ( c ) 2 . Here, m = mass of the body. c = velocity of light. Is t the time?
asked 2022-10-21
In classical (Newtonian) mechanics, every observer had the same past and the same future and if you had perfect knowledge about the current state of all particles in the universe, you could (theoretically) compute the future state of all particles in the universe.
With special (and general) relativity, we have the relativity of simultaneity. Therefore the best we can do is to say that for an event happening right now for any particular observer, we can theoretically predict the event if we know everything about the past light cone of the observer. However, it tachyons (that always travel faster than the speed of light) are allowed, then we cannot predict the future since a tachyon can come in from the space-like region for the observer and can cause an event that cannot be predicted by the past light cone. That is, I believe, why tachyons are incompatible with causality in relativity. Basically, the future cannot be predicted for any given observer so the universe is in general unpredictable - i.e. physics is impossible.
Now in quantum mechanics, perfect predictability is impossible in principle. Instead all we can predict is the probability of events happening. However, Schrodinger's equation allows the future wavefunction to be calculated given the current wavefunction. However, the wavefunction only allows for the predictions of probabilities of events happening. Quantum mechanics claims that this is the calculations of probabilities is the best that can be done by any physical theory.
So the question is: "Is the predictability of the future to whatever extent is possible (based on the present and the past) equivalent to the principle of causality?" Since prediction is the goal of physics and science in general, causality is necessary for physics and science to be possible.
asked 2022-07-16
is space expansion the same as time dilation ?
asked 2022-09-23
Trying to derive the infinitesimal time dilation relation d t = Ξ³ d Ο„, where Ο„ is the proper time, 𝑑 the coordinate time, and Ξ³ = ( 1 βˆ’ v ( t ) 2 / c 2 ) βˆ’ 1 / 2 the time dependent Lorentz factor. The derivation is trivial if one starts by considering the invariant interval d s 2 , but it should be possible to obtain the result considering only Lorentz transformations. So, in my approach I am using two different reference frames ( t , x ) will denote an intertial laboratory frame while ( t β€² , x β€² ) will be the set of all inertial frames momentarily coinciding with the observed particle, i.e. the rest frame of the particle. These frames are related by
t β€² = Ξ³ ( t βˆ’ V x c ) , x β€² = Ξ³ ( x βˆ’ V t ) ,
where V is some nonconstant (i.e. time dependent) parameter which is, hopefully, the velocity of the particle in the laboratory frame. Treating x, t and V as independent variables (for now) and taking the differential of the above relations,
d t β€² = Ξ³ ( d t βˆ’ V d x c ) βˆ’ Ξ³ 3 c 2 ( x βˆ’ V t ) d V , and
d x β€² = Ξ³ ( d x βˆ’ V d t ) βˆ’ Ξ³ 3 ( t βˆ’ V x c ) d V .
Imposing either the definition of the rest frame d x β€² = 0 or (what should be equivalent) d x = V d t, the only way in which i obtain d t = Ξ³ d t β€² is if d V = 0. So, the derivation breaks badly at some point or I must be wrong in using some of the above equations. Which one is it?
asked 2022-05-19
It seems odd that entropy is usually only defined for a system in a single 'slice' of time or spacelike region. Can one define the entropy of a system defined by a 4d region of spacetime, in such a way that yields a codimension one definition which agrees with the usual one when the codimension one slice is spacelike?
asked 2022-09-30
How much does a proton weigh when it is going around the LHC at CERN?
Considering that speed increases weight and the proton is going at almost the speed of light, I would like to know how much a speeding proton would weigh in the LHC.
asked 2022-05-17
if u and u β€² are a velocity referred to two inertial frames with relative velocity v confined to the x axis, then the quantities l, m, n defined by
( l , m , n ) = 1 | u | ( u x , u y , u z )
and
( l β€² , m β€² , n β€² ) = 1 | u β€² | ( u x β€² , u y β€² , u z β€² )
are related by
( l β€² , m β€² , n β€² ) = 1 D ( l βˆ’ v u , m Ξ³ βˆ’ 1 , n Ξ³ βˆ’ 1 )
and that this can be considered a relativistic aberration formula. The author gives the following definition for D, copied verbatim.
D = u β€² u ( 1 βˆ’ u x v c 2 ) = [ 1 βˆ’ 2 l v u + v 2 u 2 βˆ’ ( 1 βˆ’ l 2 ) v 2 c 2 ] 1 2
Why is that better than the second expression?
Also, in case it's not clear, Ξ³ = 1 / 1 βˆ’ v 2 c 2 and | u | = | ( u x , u y , u z ) | = u x 2 + u y 2 + u z 2

New questions