News from the LHC

[P3nT4gR4m]

Okay here's my idea (dumb layman shit) we got a field of these boson things and when particles move through the field the bosons give them mass, right? So how are the bosons arranged? Like before an particle goes bombing through they're all just sitting there. So what if the field is like a lattice, with some string or force or some shit holding them together, like a net. So when a particle moves through the field it's not so much getting these bosons stuck to it, it's more like it's deforming the lattice so that things that are also caught in the lattice get pulled that way. Bing - gravity.

[Nephew Twiddleton]

If a graviton exists and it doesnt have mass then it would be permitted to have infinite speed no?

Remember all the fuss a couple of months back about those neutrinos that supposedly showed up too soon, it was a mistake but it sparked a lot of debate. photons don't have mass but they obey the speed of light conventions.
With gravity it's more tricky because as a carrier force, it's range does not seem to have a limit. If that is true than a graviton would have to be faster than light.
It's why renormalisation is so hard difficult, with the other carrier forces we were able to plug in observed measurements for them and get pretty accurate equations. How do you do that on something with such a large range on influence?

True. Yeah, I forgot about the neutrino thing.

[Nephew Twiddleton]

Okay here's my idea (dumb layman shit) we got a field of these boson things and when particles move through the field the bosons give them mass, right? So how are the bosons arranged? Like before an particle goes bombing through they're all just sitting there. So what if the field is like a lattice, with some string or force or some shit holding them together, like a net. So when a particle moves through the field it's not so much getting these bosons stuck to it, it's more like it's deforming the lattice so that things that are also caught in the lattice get pulled that way. Bing - gravity.

I think that's how gravity works anyway, with or without bosons being added to the equation. I've heard it described that spacetime can be thought of a rubber sheet, and that an object with mass will push down on it, causing other objects to fall towards it. Except the sheet is three dimensional in gets pinched in three dimensions. And that yet the universe is still flat....

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Okay here's my idea (dumb layman shit) we got a field of these boson things and when particles move through the field the bosons give them mass, right? So how are the bosons arranged? Like before an particle goes bombing through they're all just sitting there. So what if the field is like a lattice, with some string or force or some shit holding them together, like a net. So when a particle moves through the field it's not so much getting these bosons stuck to it, it's more like it's deforming the lattice so that things that are also caught in the lattice get pulled that way. Bing - gravity.

I think that's how gravity works anyway, with or without bosons being added to the equation. I've heard it described that spacetime can be thought of a rubber sheet, and that an object with mass will push down on it, causing other objects to fall towards it. Except the sheet is three dimensional in gets pinched in three dimensions. And that yet the universe is still flat....

Yeah, but it's still useful to look at it as a 2 dimensional thing, because you then can understand it without your brain kinking up.

[Telarus]

Okay here's my idea (dumb layman shit) we got a field of these boson things and when particles move through the field the bosons give them mass, right? So how are the bosons arranged? Like before an particle goes bombing through they're all just sitting there. So what if the field is like a lattice, with some string or force or some shit holding them together, like a net. So when a particle moves through the field it's not so much getting these bosons stuck to it, it's more like it's deforming the lattice so that things that are also caught in the lattice get pulled that way. Bing - gravity.

I think that's how gravity works anyway, with or without bosons being added to the equation. I've heard it described that spacetime can be thought of a rubber sheet, and that an object with mass will push down on it, causing other objects to fall towards it. Except the sheet is three dimensional in gets pinched in three dimensions. And that yet the universe is still flat....

Yes, P3nt has intuited the basics of the Einstein model. It's not that objects get "pulled", but more that they have linear inertia (tendency to travel in a straight line unless acted upon by an outside force), and that gravity then _bends_ the space-time lattice so that "linear vectors" just aren't straight anymore. Weird, huh? (...and, again, only a model/abstraction.)

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Okay here's my idea (dumb layman shit) we got a field of these boson things and when particles move through the field the bosons give them mass, right? So how are the bosons arranged? Like before an particle goes bombing through they're all just sitting there. So what if the field is like a lattice, with some string or force or some shit holding them together, like a net. So when a particle moves through the field it's not so much getting these bosons stuck to it, it's more like it's deforming the lattice so that things that are also caught in the lattice get pulled that way. Bing - gravity.

I think that's how gravity works anyway, with or without bosons being added to the equation. I've heard it described that spacetime can be thought of a rubber sheet, and that an object with mass will push down on it, causing other objects to fall towards it. Except the sheet is three dimensional in gets pinched in three dimensions. And that yet the universe is still flat....

Yes, P3nt has intuited the basics of the Einstein model. It's not that objects get "pulled", but ore that they have linear inertia (tendency to travel in a straight line unless acted upon by an outside force), and that gravity then _bends_ the space-time lattice so that "linear vectors" just aren't straight anymore. Weird, huh? (...and, again, only a model/abstraction.)

That's how the Earth goes around the sun without flinging everyone off.  It's traveling in a perfectly straight line, on bent space.

Which is cheating.

[Telarus]

That's how the Earth goes around the sun without flinging everyone off.  It's traveling in a perfectly straight line, on bent space.

Which is cheating.

Exactly

[The Good Reverend Roger]

That's how the Earth goes around the sun without flinging everyone off.  It's traveling in a perfectly straight line, on bent space.

Which is cheating.

Exactly

I don't believe in the God of the Gaps.  He did ALL of this shit, and HE DID IT ON PURPOSE.  It's a fucking shell game.  "Hey, monkeys!  Is it a particle or a wave?  HAW HAW!"

[Nephew Twiddleton]

That's how the Earth goes around the sun without flinging everyone off.  It's traveling in a perfectly straight line, on bent space.

Which is cheating.

Exactly

I don't believe in the God of the Gaps.  He did ALL of this shit, and HE DID IT ON PURPOSE.  It's a fucking shell game.  "Hey, monkeys!  Is it a particle or a wave?  HAW HAW!"

Okay here's my idea (dumb layman shit) we got a field of these boson things and when particles move through the field the bosons give them mass, right? So how are the bosons arranged? Like before an particle goes bombing through they're all just sitting there. So what if the field is like a lattice, with some string or force or some shit holding them together, like a net. So when a particle moves through the field it's not so much getting these bosons stuck to it, it's more like it's deforming the lattice so that things that are also caught in the lattice get pulled that way. Bing - gravity.

I think that's how gravity works anyway, with or without bosons being added to the equation. I've heard it described that spacetime can be thought of a rubber sheet, and that an object with mass will push down on it, causing other objects to fall towards it. Except the sheet is three dimensional in gets pinched in three dimensions. And that yet the universe is still flat....

Yeah, but it's still useful to look at it as a 2 dimensional thing, because you then can understand it without your brain kinking up.

That's for sure. I had to stop myself from doing so.

ETA: fixed jumbled up multiquote.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

That's for sure. I had to stop myself from doing so.

That's the worst.  You then have to explain like a hundred times a day why you're doing everything sideways.

[Nephew Twiddleton]

That's for sure. I had to stop myself from doing so.

That's the worst.  You then have to explain like a hundred times a day why you're doing everything sideways.

Oh god I'm thinking about it again!!!

[guryaf]

Okay here's my idea (dumb layman shit) we got a field of these boson things and when particles move through the field the bosons give them mass, right? So how are the bosons arranged? Like before an particle goes bombing through they're all just sitting there. So what if the field is like a lattice, with some string or force or some shit holding them together, like a net. So when a particle moves through the field it's not so much getting these bosons stuck to it, it's more like it's deforming the lattice so that things that are also caught in the lattice get pulled that way. Bing - gravity.

I don't think Higgs bosons have anything to do with gravity, based on what I've read in the past ~15 minutes.

[Kai]

The big one would be gravity as per general relativity.  But yeah, dark matter is somewhere in there.

It seems that figuring out the speed at which gravity operates would be an excellent way to start. The big hypothesis is that it's the same as the speed of light, or that's what I've heard)

My grandfather has been attempting to get at this problem since he finished his time dilation  research years ago. First step was figuring out the density of the earth. I remember him working with equations associated with the flattening of the Earth's crust and the reduction in flattening caused by slowing rotation. Don't think he ever got beyond diagramming the equipment involved.

And the really hard part of figuring out the speed at which gravity operates is that it tends to veer towards infinity. Even if you have the exact known mass of something large enough to have a measurable effect on an other object in a vacuum you still have to find a way to make the maths renormalise without getting that annoying infinity result.

The problem seems to be that we don't have rapid, large changes in mass happen often enough. That's how we figured out the speed of light. Electromagnetic waves traveling between two electrons over great distances in a discrete manner (i.e. we can watch them from start to stop and time them) is a normal part of our universe. If mass appeared or disappeared in space time we'd have some better idea of it, but these changes in mass and proximity are gradual and continuous.

[P3nT4gR4m]

I can't get my head around how gravity can have a speed Like the Einstein space-time curvature was explained to me like a pool table that gets bent so the balls roll in toward the heavy things? So the idea that the pool table has a speed is confusing to me - surely it's the balls that have a speed? Can someone pls explain in dumb baby language why gravity needs a speed 

[Faust]

The big one would be gravity as per general relativity.  But yeah, dark matter is somewhere in there.

It seems that figuring out the speed at which gravity operates would be an excellent way to start. The big hypothesis is that it's the same as the speed of light, or that's what I've heard)

My grandfather has been attempting to get at this problem since he finished his time dilation  research years ago. First step was figuring out the density of the earth. I remember him working with equations associated with the flattening of the Earth's crust and the reduction in flattening caused by slowing rotation. Don't think he ever got beyond diagramming the equipment involved.

And the really hard part of figuring out the speed at which gravity operates is that it tends to veer towards infinity. Even if you have the exact known mass of something large enough to have a measurable effect on an other object in a vacuum you still have to find a way to make the maths renormalise without getting that annoying infinity result.

The problem seems to be that we don't have rapid, large changes in mass happen often enough. That's how we figured out the speed of light. Electromagnetic waves traveling between two electrons over great distances in a discrete manner (i.e. we can watch them from start to stop and time them) is a normal part of our universe. If mass appeared or disappeared in space time we'd have some better idea of it, but these changes in mass and proximity are gradual and continuous.

Exactly and thus there is no way to come up with an experimental setup.