Why can't we go faster than light?

[ajb]

Okay, so we have a Yukawa coupling between the fermions and the Higgs field. Where does this coupling depend on the velocity and what would that mean for a Lorentz invariant theory?

[SamBridge]

 

let me try to explain the second part better.

the speed of light is the speed at which disturbances such as waves move period. it is a constant. everything in the universe can be expressed as a wave function.

interaction with fields such as the higgs field creates a gradient between two fields. if light is a constant then you can create a graph to plot the effects of relativity.

the effects naturally come out as a consequence of comparison.

You're basically not saying anything other than "waves move at a constant speed through a given medium," you did't explain anything like why the interaction with the higgs field distorts space and why that distortion happens in just the right way to keep mass-ful objects from accelerating to the speed of light, why does the interaction with the higgs field become strong just because you accelerate, why time slows down and why length contracts. If I look at waves in the air or water where there's also no noticeable time dilation or length contraction, an object can accelerate right past the sound barrier, but this is not true of near-luminal travel.

Edited April 6, 2014 by SamBridge

[davidivad]

You're basically not saying anything other than "waves move at a constant speed through a given medium," you did't explain anything like why the interaction with the higgs field distorts space and why that distortion happens in just the right way to keep mass-ful objects from accelerating to the speed of light, why does the interaction with the higgs field become strong just because you accelerate, why time slows down and why length contracts. If I look at waves in the air or water where there's also no noticeable time dilation or length contraction, an object can accelerate right past the sound barrier, but this is not true of near-luminal travel.

 

my analogy can only go so far.

it is an analogy.

if you beg an analogy you can get a false statement.

did you understand the concept that we are made of waves and that they move at the speed of light?

this was my goal.

 

 

Okay, so we have a Yukawa coupling between the fermions and the Higgs field. Where does this coupling depend on the velocity and what would that mean for a Lorentz invariant theory?

 

you probably have a much better grasp of the subject at hand than i do.

i invoke your skills for a no doubt better explanation.

[SamBridge]

 

my analogy can only go so far.

it is an analogy.

if you beg an analogy you can get a false statement.

did you understand the concept that we are made of waves and that they move at the speed of light?

this was my goal.

 

But your analogy described absolutely nothing other than what I said it described. You haven't actually addressed a single point I made which I can further illustrate by the fact that you were not able to answer ajb's questions and said to him "you're guess is better than mine," so if not even ajb can answer them, then I know you haven't been able to answer mine which are similar because you defanitely don't know the answers, and thus I have no idea why you are continuing this charade of you actually pretending you answered anything. It's completely fine to say "I don't know" to random people who are not staff members, I do it all the time.

Edited April 6, 2014 by SamBridge

[davidivad]

i would think it is unreasonable to assume i have all the answers.

you are asking a question nobody can actually answer.

 

i think it is reasonable to assume that you cannot travel faster than the speed of light. there is no instance of it in the entire universe (it's a big universe).

 

i clarified for you that it is not the higgs boson that imparts mass.

i clarified that waves travel at the speed of light and everything has a wave function.

i said c is a constant (what better argument is that against super-luminal travel?).

 

this is a common type of argument here which is a fallacy.

here is the fallacy...

if i do not have an answer i feel is adequate then nothing i say is credible.

the fallacy goes futher as to imply that if i submit to a higher authority (i don't have a better explanation than ajb) then i must submit.

why would i have to submit twice?

 

the fact is that taking apart an analogy is a fun thing to do.

but as the author of the said statement, i maintain the right to express how far it should be taken.

i appreciate your response, as it is great argument exercise.

a very important tool in science.

[SamBridge]

i would think it is unreasonable to assume i have all the answers.

you are asking a question nobody can actually answer.

 

Then stop pretending you answered it, jeez.

[davidivad]

just for clarification what was the question?

[SamBridge]

just for clarification what was the question?

See ajb's questions.

[davidivad]

please ask ajb, he has a better solution.

[SamBridge]

please ask ajb, he has a better solution.

If he had a better solution, why did he ask you for an answer?

Edited April 6, 2014 by SamBridge

[Schneibster]

Okay, so we have a Yukawa coupling between the fermions and the Higgs field. Where does this coupling depend on the velocity and what would that mean for a Lorentz invariant theory?

 

Through SR in the Dirac field of the fermions. The Higgs scalar field is invariant over velocity. It merely acts on the masses of the fermion fields. Since these masses are determined partly by SR when the velocity is nonzero, the Higgs field interacts with the relativistic mass.

 

If I recall correctly.

 

Later: also, Dirac fields are Lorentz invariant theories. So you were redundant.

Edited April 6, 2014 by Schneibster

[ajb]

Loosely, the Higgs field gives a mass term to the fermions via a Yukawa coupling. We have something like

 

[math]\bar{\psi}\phi \psi[/math]

 

which is a "mass-like" term. The mass is a consequence of the finite expectation valve [math]|<\phi>|[/math].

 

My question is, can we really see the Higgs coupling as velocity dependent and so giving us the relativistic mass? I don't think so, but I await to be corrected.

[davidivad]

thank you Ajb.

i appreciate the input.

[ajb]

thank you Ajb.

i appreciate the input.

No problem.

 

The short answer here is that the Higgs is to do with rest mass and nothing to do with relativistic mass.

[Schneibster]

Right. The relativistic mass comes from the Dirac theory of the fermions. The Higgs field gives them mass, and then the Dirac theory makes it relativistic. Mass is an input to the Dirac theory, not an output. It is an output of the Yukawa coupling of the Dirac theory with the Higgs field.

Edited April 7, 2014 by Schneibster

[ajb]

Right. The relativistic mass comes from the Dirac theory of the fermions.

No, the relativistic mass is an artifact of special relativity.

[Schneibster]

Ummm, the Dirac theory is relativistic.

 

Explicitly. That's Standard Model.

 

More accurately it is Lorentz symmetric, which is the same thing. Lorentz symmetry is the symmetry of SR. You can look at it as, it's the symmetry that makes the Dirac field anticommutate.

Edited April 7, 2014 by Schneibster

[ajb]

Ummm, the Dirac theory is relativistic.

 

Explicitly. That's Standard Model.

 

More accurately it is Lorentz symmetric, which is the same thing. Lorentz symmetry is the symmetry of SR. You can look at it as, it's the symmetry that makes the Dirac field anticommutate.

The relativistic mass is not really anything to do with the fact we have fermions or the details of the Dirac equation or the Higgs mechanism. It is completley understood in the context of special relatvity, that is my point.

[Schneibster]

The Dirac theory's relativity acts on the mass attribute determined by the Yukawa coupling between the Higgs field and the Dirac field, is my point.

The point being that it's not the velocity that the Higgs field couples to. That coupling is not through the Higgs field but through the Dirac field.

 

The Higgs field's Yukawa coupling strength increases with acceleration.

[ajb]

The Dirac theory's relativity acts on the mass attribute determined by the Yukawa coupling between the Higgs field and the Dirac field, is my point.

Yes, the rest or invariant mass.

 

The Higgs field's Yukawa coupling strength increases with acceleration.

Can you show me?

[Schneibster]

Yes, the rest or invariant mass.

 

Yes. The Yukawa interaction brings that in from the Higgs field.

Can you show me?

 

I believe I just did.

[ajb]

I believe I just did.

No, you you just made a statement. I would like to see how the Yukawa coupling changes with acceleration of something.

[Schneibster]

No, I made a series of statements. Denying the last one is bad form. Prove which one that preceded it you disagree with. Or prove what's missing from them.

[ajb]

The Higgs field's Yukawa coupling strength increases with acceleration.

I want to understand this statement. Please show me where it has come from.

[Schneibster]

Let's try this again:

 

Higgs field ->

Scalar field

Extremely simple has only one interaction besides self-interactions

couples through Yukawa interaction with

Dirac field ->

Yukawa interaction with Higgs field provides "rest mass"

Dirac field is more complex, provides many attributes

Dirac field is explicitly relativistic, incorporates Lorentz symmetry

Lorentz symmetry acts on "rest mass" (see above)

 

Now

 

mass ->

more properly mass/energy or stress-energy tensor

Acts upon all three both of

Ricci tensor

metric tensor

cosmological constant

And is in turn acted upon by them.

 

Are we good so far?

I want to understand this statement. Please show me where it has come from.

 

I'm working on it. Please answer if we're good so far.

 

Note, updated once.

Edited April 7, 2014 by Schneibster