December 14th, 2011, 02:55 PM
Open letter to scientific community
Dear Sirs,
Higgs boson will be never discovered as it not exists.
Physicists as the CERN know that, what they are telling us this days in media is just to get money for searching for a black cat in a black room that is not there.
Our research shows mass has origin in energy density of quantum vacuum. You can see on our home page.
Yours Sincerely, Amrit Sorli, Space Life Institute
And your proof for this is?Originally Posted by albert2
Mass is an energy form of quantum vacuum in symmetry with diminished energy density of quantum vacuum. Presence of mass diminishes energy density of quantum vacuum respectively to the energy of a given mass. A given particle with a mass diminishes energy density of quantum vacuum, mass-less particle does not diminish energy of quantum vacuum. In order to explain mass of elementary particles this view does not require existence of the hypothetical boson of Higgs. see more on HomeAnd your proof for this is?
This makes no sense whatsoever. The quantum vaccum is the zero-point of a quantum mechanical system; its energy is the expectation value of the Hamilton operator of the system in its ground state. The ground state is by definition the lowest state of the system, and you cannot extract or convert energy out of this state without altering the system, creating a new ( lower ) ground state.
It also makes no sense from the viewpoint of spacial coordinates - where there is vacuum, there is no mass. Where there is mass, there is no vacuum.
Furthermore it would violate the laws of thermodynamics, because the vacuum is always the highest state of entropy in any system.
Lastly, such a mechanism couldn't explain why different particles get different masses, and also no description of the actual mechanism is given - why would a stable vacuum convert into mass ?
In my mind the entire concept is a non-starter from the beginning, because it is based on a false understanding of the concept of "zero-point energy".
I have seen such statements too many times from too many people on different forums around the Internet. They usually come about from a failure to completely understand the Higgs mechanism, and how it fits into the Standard Model ( and all the rest of physics, for that matter ) and its various proposed extensions.
If the Higgs boson is never discovered, the Standard Model in its current form would cease to be an internally consistent theory and would have to be re-worked. I think this is not very likely ( but not impossible either ! ), simply because many predictions of the Standard Model are experimentally well verified.
We shall see, perhaps as early as next year. At the moment a blanket statement such as the above has no basis in theoretical or experimental physics.
None of the articles referenced on this page are accessible except the first one; this doesn't inspire much confidence. Neither does the fact that this gentleman seems to be in the habit of referencing himself in his publications, as for example here :
http://www.wbabin.net/sorli/sorli4.pdf
Also, the "Space Life Institute" consists of exactly two members so far as I can see, and doesn't appear to be affiliated to any established and well regarded scientific institutions.
Wtf albert2 are you an agent trying to protect people from what's going on or some thing?
Cos it sure sounds like it!
Last edited by Bad monkey; December 15th, 2011 at 12:03 PM. Reason: Left out info
we are two in Space Life Institute, we have some external collaborators and our work is mainly published in Physics essays - AIP
search | Physics Essays
I think Albert2 is wrong about the Higgs Boson, because, as quantum physics and cosmology tend to point to (no pun intended) a fundamental building block is needed, otherwise TOO MUCH vacuum must be calculated into the tally. Too much vacuum and electrons stop orbitting.This makes no sense whatsoever. The quantum vaccum is the zero-point of a quantum mechanical system; its energy is the expectation value of the Hamilton operator of the system in its ground state. The ground state is by definition the lowest state of the system, and you cannot extract or convert energy out of this state without altering the system, creating a new ( lower ) ground state.
It also makes no sense from the viewpoint of spacial coordinates - where there is vacuum, there is no mass. Where there is mass, there is no vacuum.
Furthermore it would violate the laws of thermodynamics, because the vacuum is always the highest state of entropy in any system.
Lastly, such a mechanism couldn't explain why different particles get different masses, and also no description of the actual mechanism is given - why would a stable vacuum convert into mass ?
In my mind the entire concept is a non-starter from the beginning, because it is based on a false understanding of the concept of "zero-point energy".
What he may be hinting about is SUB-vacuum potential or SUB- zero point energy. I find it unlikely that everything that makes up the cosmos was always there, as so many want to subscribe to, but it does make sense that infinite potential energy was and still is a precursor of virtual mass, then actual mass.
who says everything was there from the start?
| « Are the Modern Scientific and Review Processes Killing INnovation and Maybe Even More Than That? | We all know why we're here, right? » |
| Bookmarks |
Bookmarks |
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
