Trying to make sense of quantum uncertainty

[HoneyNut]

photons (light particles used in the experiment) do not interact significantly with the Higgs field due to their lack of mass at the relevant energy scales

A lecture I was listening to a few days ago while on my treadmill said that photons have no mass because they don't interact with the Higgs field (i.e., that interacting with the Higgs field is what gives mass to things). (So, similar to what you posted but a little reversed: from 'do not interact...with the Higgs field due to their lack of mass' to 'do not have mass due to not interacting with the Higgs field')

Though I sure don't have enough background for any of this to make much sense to me, I'd even been thinking of changing the lecture series because the physics series is leaving me feeling lacking in intelligence, but now I'm glad to have been sticking it out since it gives me something to say on SF posts.

 

[Medusa]

A lecture I was listening to a few days ago while on my treadmill said that photons have no mass because they don't interact with the Higgs field (i.e., that interacting with the Higgs field is what gives mass to things). (So, similar to what you posted but a little reversed: from 'do not interact...with the Higgs field due to their lack of mass' to 'do not have mass due to not interacting with the Higgs field')

Though I sure don't have enough background for any of this to make much sense to me, I'd even been thinking of changing the lecture series because the physics series is leaving me feeling lacking in intelligence, but now I'm glad to have been sticking it out since it gives me something to say on SF posts.

Check me on this: I'm thinking this is similar if not the same, i.e, not interacting with the Higgs Field due to a lack of mass is the same, as not having mass due to not interacting with the Higgs Field.

Edited to correct spelling error.

 

[papa tiger]

The Lab the other day turned light into a flowing liquid.
Doubt a Quantum computer will ever make it to the average persons desk or home.
Quantum stuff has no meaning to the normal persons day.
The only reason for Time to pass is there is something alive to experience the delay.
No life, no time passing. Endless eternity / infinity.
Only way a star knows its time is near its end, --- it grows fat.

 

[bobcat]

Check me on this: I'm thinking this is similar if not the same, i.e, not interacting with the Higgs Vield due to a lack of mass is the same, as not having mass due to not interacting with the Higgs Field.

Yes, I think it's similar, just stated another way. It's kinda like someone saying I don't eat cookies because they cause weight gain, or saying I haven't gained weight because I don't eat cookies.

 

[OregonGuy]

A lecture I was listening to a few days ago while on my treadmill said that photons have no mass because they don't interact with the Higgs field (i.e., that interacting with the Higgs field is what gives mass to things). (So, similar to what you posted but a little reversed: from 'do not interact...with the Higgs field due to their lack of mass' to 'do not have mass due to not interacting with the Higgs field')

Though I sure don't have enough background for any of this to make much sense to me, I'd even been thinking of changing the lecture series because the physics series is leaving me feeling lacking in intelligence, but now I'm glad to have been sticking it out since it gives me something to say on SF posts.

thank you for digesting this stuff for us

 

[HoneyNut]

Check me on this: I'm thinking this is similar if not the same, i.e, not interacting with the Higgs Field due to a lack of mass is the same, as not having mass due to not interacting with the Higgs Field.

Oh my poor brain, although I took a whole course on logic in college, that was a million years ago, so I just asked CHATGPT instead...

ChatGPT said:​

Not exactly. While these two statements are related, they differ in their logical structure.​

1. "Photons don't have mass because they don't interact with the Higgs field."
   
   • This statement suggests that the lack of interaction with the Higgs field is the cause of photons having no mass.
   • This is generally considered accurate within the Standard Model of particle physics. The Higgs mechanism gives mass to many particles by coupling to them, but photons do not couple to the Higgs field, so they remain massless.
2. "Photons don't interact with the Higgs field due to not having mass."
   
   • This statement reverses the causality, implying that not having mass is the reason photons don't interact with the Higgs field.
   • This is incorrect because it confuses the relationship between mass and the Higgs interaction. The Higgs field gives mass to particles that interact with it; mass is a consequence, not a prerequisite for interaction.
   • A better way to phrase it would be: "Photons do not interact with the Higgs field, and as a result, they do not acquire mass."

So, while the two statements seem similar, the first one correctly reflects the role of the Higgs field in mass generation, whereas the second one misrepresents the dependency.​

 

[Medusa]

Oh my poor brain, although I took a whole course on logic in college, that was a million years ago, so I just asked CHATGPT instead...

ChatGPT said:​

Not exactly. While these two statements are related, they differ in their logical structure.​

1. "Photons don't have mass because they don't interact with the Higgs field."
   
   • This statement suggests that the lack of interaction with the Higgs field is the cause of photons having no mass.
   • This is generally considered accurate within the Standard Model of particle physics. The Higgs mechanism gives mass to many particles by coupling to them, but photons do not couple to the Higgs field, so they remain massless.
2. "Photons don't interact with the Higgs field due to not having mass."
   
   • This statement reverses the causality, implying that not having mass is the reason photons don't interact with the Higgs field.
   • This is incorrect because it confuses the relationship between mass and the Higgs interaction. The Higgs field gives mass to particles that interact with it; mass is a consequence, not a prerequisite for interaction.
   • A better way to phrase it would be: "Photons do not interact with the Higgs field, and as a result, they do not acquire mass."

So, while the two statements seem similar, the first one correctly reflects the role of the Higgs field in mass generation, whereas the second one misrepresents the dependency.​

A semantics issue, then. But an important distinction. Thank you.