In three consecutive ceremonies in Asia, Europe and the Americas, the authors officially handed the report over to the international oversight board for projects in particle physics, the International Committee for Future Accelerators (ICFA). The report presents the latest, most technologically advanced and most thoroughly scrutinized design for the ILC. The ILC will accelerate and collide electrons and their antiparticles, positrons. Collisions will occur roughly 7000 times per second at the collision energy of 500 GeV. Some 16,000 superconducting cavities will be needed to drive the ILC's particle beams. The report also includes details of two state-of-the-art detectors that will record the collisions, as well as an extensive outline of the geological and civil engineering studies conducted for siting the ILC. "The Technical Design Report is an impressive piece of work that shows maturity, scrutiny and boldness," says Lyn Evans, director of the Linear Collider Collaboration. "The International Linear Collider should be next on the agenda for global particle physics." Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2013-06-international-linear-collider-ready.html#jCp
It seems like they already think they goofed by building the LHC, a LEP collider is more accurate and so then they could obtain better values for the Higgs Boson. I think they should have saved a lot of time and trouble just making it a LEP instead to begin with, I doubt they will be opened welcomely to government investors since they just got their new big toy. So who know's how long it will be until they figure out if we know everything or not? I think they still came up missing a couple of different versions of Higgs Bosons that I haven't heard about them finding yet. "Among other particles, the ILC will produce Higgs bosons and study their properties in detail to determine whether they are as predicted by the Standard Model. Will the Higgs particle be just the first of a family? Will nature be more complicated than a single "minimal" Higgs boson? And how does the Higgs interact with other particles?"
[citation needed] Why do you think this, Layman? They did. The LEP ran from 1989 to 2000, then was decommissioned and replaced by the LHC, which can produce much higher collision energies (hundreds of times more). Never.
I read about it in The Particle at the Edge of the Universe, by Sean Carroll. The book was mostly about finding the Higgs Boson at the LHC. I think it also talked about plans for a new bigger LEP. It also talked about electron theory and how the standard model only says that electrons give off photons as a force carrier. It talks about how Sean Carroll holds on to this theory, but, then the Higgs Boson doesn't obey this global symmetry and that there is perhaps another intermediate particle that has never been detected from the Higgs Boson to the photons that are detected that give the indication that there was a Higgs Boson. That perhaps may be a goldstone boson. The only reason it is said to have to exist is because of Feynman Diagrams. The Higgs Boson itself shouldn't be able to emit two photons according to this theory, but this instance of detection gives the most accurate data. I would recommend reading it if you want to know more about different types of symmetries and what that means when physicist refer to them. But basically the Higgs Boson can create photons when it shouldn't be able to, it is not symmetric to the idea that they only come from electrons or charged particles. It doesn't fit with modern theory unless they add another charged particle into the mix that is somehow created from a Higgs Boson that then decays into two photons. The Goldstone Boson wasn't accepted to be an actual particle and it was said that it simply makes two wrongs make a right. Meaning that there could actually not be global symmetry in the regard to photons only coming from charged particles, to just making the theory fit as though there is global symmetry by then introducing a new pseudo particle that would just give the illusion that global symmetry is actually there when it really isn't. There would be no way to know for sure by introducing this new particle. Ya, but it didn't work at high enough energies in order to detect the Higgs Boson. So then it didn't matter that it was more accurate, I think they have feared that the LHC just will not be accurate enough just because it smashes the wrong particles. I don't think they will be certain if it is actually the Higgs Boson predicted by the standard model until they build a new LEP.
And where does he say that they "goofed" building the LHC? I'm not sure you've understood his message correctly. Amateurs like you and I have to be a bit suspicious about how much understanding we can really gain from pop-science materials, right? Maybe... it actually had results at a 90% confidence level before it was shut down. Your pop-science understanding doesn't match mine, which indicates that the LHC collides the right particles for discovery of new high-energy particles, while different accelerators (like the ILC) collide the right particles for precise measurement of the particles discovered.
It doesn't. But clearly they did, if they built the LHC to detect this particle, but then it wasn't good enough or accurate enough. They are already making plans to construct a new one obviously because of this. This should be clear from the original link given in this thread in post #1. "Among other particles, the ILC will produce Higgs bosons and study their properties in detail to determine whether they are as predicted by the Standard Model. Will the Higgs particle be just the first of a family? Will nature be more complicated than a single "minimal" Higgs boson? And how does the Higgs interact with other particles?" It made me think twice about going to college in Chicago and becoming a particle physicist. If I did that now all I would probably have to look forward too is trying to push theory on people on the internet, that they would most likely deem as complete nonsense. They are still reviewing the data, there is a lot they didn't sort through while it was online. That is exactly the same message I was trying to portray. I don't see how that came across as something otherwise. Therefore, they would need a higher energy LEP to then make a precise enough measurement to determine if the particle they discovered is actually the Higgs Boson. Like I mentioned before, the Higgs Boson seems to create photons when it shouldn't be able too, it is not a charged particle so then they don't even know for sure what this other charged particle could be or if it even really exist. (of course I think you realize by now that I don't think it does) The book doesn't even have the brass to even give a name to this particle, but then dances around the idea of the Goldstone Boson.
What good is an education without job placement opportunities? How else can you then take hold of the reigns?
This does not imply that the LHC was a "goof". I think you misunderstand the different purposes of the LHC and proposed ILC. I don't pretend to understand them well myself, but my understanding is that thanks to the LHC, enough is now known about the Higgs that the ILC can examine it in more detail. The LHC is continuing to explore, and may make more discoveries that could in turn be examined more closely colliders like the ILC. To use a questionable analogy, it's like using a radio telescope to find something interesting, and an optical telescope to examine it in fine detail. Without the radio telescope, you wouldn't know where to point the optical telescope. Without the optical telescope, there's only limited information you can get from the radio telescope. Both are useful, and each makes the other more useful. Try reading these: The International Linear Collider is coming – but why do we need it? (Pop science, includes video) The LHC and the ILC (pdf) (Slides for a talk given in 2005, ie pre-LHC, at the 2005 International Linear Collider Workshop explaining how the capabilities of the LHC and ILC complement each other)
I don't think it could really be seen to be a mistake until they are denied construction of this new accelerator, and then we are left here wondering why they never were able to confirm that it is the actual Higgs Boson that was predicted by the Standard Model. To me it sounded like the only thing we could get out of the LHC was just finding out if there was even anything close to being a Higgs Boson. To then say right after finding it that we need a new accelerator to find out if it was what we where actually looking for shows that there was a lack of judgement in determining what type of accelerator to build to begin with. Why couldn't they just have built a bigger LEP that could detect it and then run accurate measurements to find out if that was exactly what they where looking for? I think it will take building it in order for them to be certain that it is not the Higgs Boson they where looking for. Until then we can only wonder if it actually is and if modern physics is correct in every respect, but until then I don't think we have proven that everything in Modern Physics is completely correct in every respect until that day they confirm that it is exactly the Higgs Boson predicted by the Standard Model. I find it hard to conceive how this could be exactly the Higgs Boson predicted by the Standard Model, when its discovery leads to the finding of a new particle that cannot be officially named. Then it seems that the only particle that fits the description of taking this role has then been previously rejected by the scientific community, and nobody thought that they should find this particle or that it should even exist before the discovery of this Higgs-Like Boson, that would then be a God-Like Particle.
They were planning the ILC before the LHC was built. This is not a new project. Because the LHC does things the ILC can't, and vice-versa. They are complementary. We already know that Modern Physics is not completely correct in every respect.
Well, I guess that could change things, they must know someone with much deeper pockets than mine. There was a bit of debate if they would even find the Higgs Boson, I guess the LHC would be the best way to go if they had a concern about even finding the particle to begin with. But then, what role will the LHC fill once it is determined that they have found all the particles that can be found, even the ones they don't care to name? Do you really think they would use data from the LEP to then discover the other Higgs-Like Boson's? I think I would be happy with my limited understanding of it if there was only one Higgs-Like Boson. I don't really see why there are more, and if there are not more then what use would the LHC really have? I am completely shocked that you would say this. But, it seems like if we did, then discovering the Higgs Boson wouldn't have been as a difficult endeavor that it has been. We should have been able to just crunch the numbers and then turn it on and say, oops there it is. Then it turns out that it was in the last possible ranges of masses that they thought it would be in.
Don't know. Maybe decommissioned. But, I also don't know how or if it could ever be known that "they" have found all the particles that be found. Don't know. I think "they" would be happy with finding out if there are more Higgs-like Bosons. And I don't pretend to understand particle physics enough to make any kind of judgement on whether or not there could be more. Why? If people thought that Modern Physics was completely correct in every respect, then why would we be investing in physics research projects?
I don't think the Higgs Boson was the only predicted theoretical boson that could be found, although interest in it was what drove them to try to discover this new particle. But, I think it was viewed as the most accurate prediction that there should be of this new type of particle, then other similar types of particles like the Goldstone Boson was shoved under the rug. I think it would be funny if they didn't even find the Higgs-Like Boson in a LEP. Then they would really start to think God is just trying to play tricks on particle physicist. I mean how do you break particle symmetry without a whole particle cherry pie? Then why should particle symmetry be able to be broken in different ways? I don't even see any reason why a LEP should even produce a Higgs-Like Boson. If it was just another energy of a charged particle, I don't think it would even be correct to say that it is even Higgs-Like. It certainly would make it more interesting if it could not be found in a LEP. Then they would have to turn the LHC back on, and just work with what they got, that may or may not be good enough.
That would be very exciting! But unlikely. I'm not convinced you understand what 'particle symmetry' Neither do I, but that's because you and I don't actually know any particle physics. Why would the LHC be turned off?
I am not really convinced anyone else does either. I have seen some videos of Peter Higgs trying to explain it, and I have read some layman descriptions of this particle. My interpretation in layman terms is that particles can interact forwards and backwards in time, and then if this symmetry is broken of them interacting in this way then it creates a Higgs Boson. In other words, it would be like the Grandfather Paradox. Then a particle interaction that then encounters this paradox would then be met by a physical force or the Higgs Boson that would then stop it from killing its own grandfather. So then it would be like hitting spacetime itself. IDK it seems kind of far fetched but then it is the only way it seems to make any kind of sense to me. Spacetime is a scaler that can be described in the same ways the Higgs Boson is described, and spacetime would not be charged and have zero spin. For instance, why would the mass of the Higgs Boson then be greater than the hydron that it comes from? Well, then it would be just because that is the mass that is required to prevent particle temporal symmetry from being broken. It would hit the grandfather paradox with a lot of force to prevent symmetry from being broken. But, then it would seem that an electron and a positron would not have any type of temporal symmetry that could be broken from them just annihilating each other, so then it should not produce a Higgs Boson. It only seems to follow in a underdeveloped preon particle theory. Assuming that hydrons are made of preons that interact with each other. I think if the Higgs Boson wasn't found in a high energy LEP collider that preon particle theory should deserve a little more attention. I thought I just read about it being planned to be turned off in one of the links, or another video that followed the particle cherry pie video. I thought it said they would be turned off for 2 years, and then I saw a mention of plans for the LEP that was in a video shortly after the accident and them planning to turn the LHC back on. It was my mistake, I just recently have heard that there was plans for a higher energy LEP since they discovered the Higgs Boson and the reason they say they need it now.
