chron44 Posted August 14 Posted August 14 The energy associated with the Higgs field’s VEV, about 246 GeV, contributes to the overall vacuum energy of the universe. However, the contribution of the Higgs field to the vacuum energy is expected to be much larger than the observed value of the cosmological constant/ vacuum energy, leading to a significant discrepancy known as the cosmological constant problem. Why? (The cosmological constant is here in this issue treated same as the vacuum energy.) (Thus, the cosmological constant is the overall vacuum density. And the vacuum energy is seen as the fluctuations in various volumes of universe. Where the mean value is detected to about 3 GeV/m^3) The free speculation, given without proof, is that dark matter/ dark energy - yet not able to directly measure by some eluding reson. - Is involved into the Higgs field and its associated VEV. Maybe both or one of them. And it's most interesting that physics cannot directly detect these dark entities. Only observe them via the behavior of the galaxies, for example. The second speculation therefore becomes that this undetectable situation is based on the technology of how we measure in physics. And one example is that we use photons for to do this in some studies. Whereas the photon is regarded being a point particle with the smallest energy amount possible for to achieve any detection. (I am not directly referring to virtual photons, because these are mathematical "instruments", not "real" physical such. Although in the Standard Model virtual photons is regarded for real particles.) The second speculation hence becomes that we probably must "use" some "instrument" below the photon energy for to detect further physical stances. This is not yet possible. Why? /chron44
swansont Posted August 14 Posted August 14 9 minutes ago, chron44 said: The free speculation, given without proof ! Moderator Note Such conjecture does not comply with the rules of speculations. 11 minutes ago, chron44 said: Whereas the photon is regarded being a point particle with the smallest energy amount possible for to achieve any detection. Nope.
Recommended Posts