Monday, June 25, 2012
Did the LHC Discover Quasons?
L. Edgar Otto 24 June, 2012
Sometimes a kaon is just a koan or conversely. In view of my principles and objections to the nature of particle theory at the foundations and the synchronicity of the issue I reconsidered in the last couple of posts with the announcement of results on July 4 from the LHC on the nature of the Higgs. Inspired by the excellent commentary of Gibbs as to what the results mean or will come to mean I have a position as to the value of that great experimental enterprise.
Does it really matter that on the level of what a Higgs boson is supposed to do that it is many or one such particle? Does it matter if we limit our interpretations to the evidence of the nature of its spin or other ideas confined to quantum theory? In the caution of what the results can reasonably mean the question asked is "How we can know it is the Higgs?" This reads to me as if it asks can there be some lesser particles that are yet greater than those in the standard theory?
I suggest that what is discovered is a particle (or some aspects of the particle depending on the possibilities of decay, the energy inferred if missing, variations in the observed energy contained in the decay pathways, and possible observation of influences over a tunneling or action at a distance between mass like transfer of such particles.
I style these quasons for they are as if a singularity of vacuum but with complex structure. In a sense they are to be scaleless as well as scaled and may go deeper than zero as a null or negative polytope level containing the compass of our observations and the apparent consistency of physical values. Thus an atom as in the maximum symmetry of the electron configuration and of course more complicated in the idea of the contained shells of the nucleus is a quason as the universe itself conceived as quasi discrete maximum symmetry along the lines of monster groups and string theories. The nearly point like thing, an iota is not a string but analogous geometrically to the universe itself and there are analogies in between that have physical effects.
What this amounts to can be claimed not just the discovery of a particle or mechanism in the Higgs model but a confirmation of higher dimensions, variations over historical time and cause evolving between them; the idea of higher symmetries and its operations, supersymmetry without the expected shadows interpreted as a multiplicity of sparticles; and this alternative supersymmetry the grounding for supergravity ideas; and in terms of current understanding and conceptions the discovery of black hole (clear holes as the meeting between such diversity to include under the umbrella of the refined term mass-energy, actually) structured vacua objects which lead to mass distinction we imagine as the theories of dark or other hidden styles of matter, although it has been a matter of speculation that the types of normal and dark matter may derive from one more unified theory especially in terms of particle decay observations which can suggest this is the case or near it.
So, with a sober caution contained in my own views to the extent it claims to be more science than mystery of speculation what the discovery and contribution of the LHC has done, especially in our awakening to new physics of whatever description, has been grossly underestimated.
* * * * *