Two physicists who correctly predicted the mass of Higgs boson [video] • Hacker News Board

Re: Two physicists who correctly predicted the mass of Higgs boson [video]

#61

Post by bjornsing » Sun, Jan 07, 2024, 8:46 PM UTC

sigmoid10 wrote: post #60

bjornsing wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks. But weird… The previous error bounds on the top quark mass were grossly incorrect then? I mean a new estimate for the top quark mass, which is within the bounds of the previous estimate, shouldn’t make the predicted mass of the Higgs jump out of its error bounds, right?

The top quark mass itself was much, much more uncertain back then. The original paper referred to a mass with an error of 2.4GeV[1], while the latest direct measurements give an uncertainty of 0.3GeV[2]. That's an order of magnitude improvement thanks to new data collected by the LHC over the last decade. Also bear in mind that these uncertainties are given as standard deviations. Almost a third of all statistical me…

Thanks again. But in my mind that doesn’t really explain the Higgs mass prediction/estimate going from 126 +/- 2.2 GeV to 130 GeV… The reason you have that +/- 2.2 GeV is (among other things) that the mass of the top quark mass is uncertain, right? So how could a new measurement of the top quark mass make the prediction for the Higgs mass jump so far (unless the new top quark mass was wildly unexpected)?

Re: Two physicists who correctly predicted the mass of Higgs boson [video]

#62

Post by shermantanktop » Mon, Jan 08, 2024, 5:25 PM UTC

hyperthesis wrote: post #44

shermantanktop wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are unfortunately a lot of hard workers who think credit magically appears when you are smart enough, valuable enough, etc., and that seeking appropriate credit is beneath their dignity. This attitude often nicely coincides with their complete lack of skill at sticking up for themselves. There is no shame in shining a bit of light on your own value. Just don’t make it blazing sun pointing at a small accomplishm…

Sometimes the inability to stick up for themselves is less due to lack of skill than lack of a sense of value in themselves apart from their achievements.

Sure. But I’ve seen a lot of resentment from people that they weren’t being treated well, resentment that was directed at others who should have done this, should have said that, etc. Sometimes that’s correct. But the armchair psychologist in me sees a lot of blame applied to others when it shouldn’t be.

Re: Two physicists who correctly predicted the mass of Higgs boson [video]

#63

Post by shermantanktop » Mon, Jan 08, 2024, 5:29 PM UTC

n4r9 wrote: post #47

hyperthesis wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sometimes the inability to stick up for themselves is less due to lack of skill than lack of a sense of value in themselves apart from their achievements.

Or a refusal to play the social credit game.

Sure! But be intentional about the cost/benefit of opting out, rather than being pissed that the game-players are getting something you want.

Or find somewhere that operates differently. Some people hope that academia will be different and better than business. From what I can see it is often worse, but ymmv.

Re: Two physicists who correctly predicted the mass of Higgs boson [video]

#64

Post by sigmoid10 » Mon, Jan 08, 2024, 10:51 PM UTC

bjornsing wrote: post #61

sigmoid10 wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The top quark mass itself was much, much more uncertain back then. The original paper referred to a mass with an error of 2.4GeV[1], while the latest direct measurements give an uncertainty of 0.3GeV[2]. That's an order of magnitude improvement thanks to new data collected by the LHC over the last decade. Also bear in mind that these uncertainties are given as standard deviations. Almost a third of all statistical me…

Thanks again. But in my mind that doesn’t really explain the Higgs mass prediction/estimate going from 126 +/- 2.2 GeV to 130 GeV… The reason you have that +/- 2.2 GeV is (among other things) that the mass of the top quark mass is uncertain, right? So how could a new measurement of the top quark mass make the prediction for the Higgs mass jump so far (unless the new top quark mass was wildly unexpected)?

I think you misunderstand the way the Higgs mass is calculated here. This is a highly non-linear relationship that is extremely sensitive to the top quark mass. In fact the second most massive quark would only contribute a fraction of one thousandth to the result (which is why it was ignored in the paper).

Consider this toy example: The mass m is calculated from some parameter like m~=b^4 and that parameter b was measured b=2.0±0.1. Using Gaussian error propagation, m would be 16±3.2. Now update the measurement of b just slightly to b=2.1±0.05. That 5% change in b changes the result to m=19.45±1.85 -> more than 20%, and with just one standard deviation of difference in b. The relationship is not linear.

Re: Two physicists who correctly predicted the mass of Higgs boson [video]

#65

Post by bjornsing » Tue, Jan 09, 2024, 12:12 AM UTC

sigmoid10 wrote: post #64

bjornsing wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks again. But in my mind that doesn’t really explain the Higgs mass prediction/estimate going from 126 +/- 2.2 GeV to 130 GeV… The reason you have that +/- 2.2 GeV is (among other things) that the mass of the top quark mass is uncertain, right? So how could a new measurement of the top quark mass make the prediction for the Higgs mass jump so far (unless the new top quark mass was wildly unexpected)?

I think you misunderstand the way the Higgs mass is calculated here. This is a highly non-linear relationship that is extremely sensitive to the top quark mass. In fact the second most massive quark would only contribute a fraction of one thousandth to the result (which is why it was ignored in the paper). Consider this toy example: The mass m is calculated from some parameter like m~=b^4 and that parameter b was mea…

That’s a clarifying example. But note that what happened with the Higgs mass was significantly more extreme than your example. All I’m saying is that I found that surprising. But you’re right, it could potentially be an extreme non-linearity that caused the surprise.

Re: Two physicists who correctly predicted the mass of Higgs boson [video]

#66

Post by Qwertious » Sat, Jan 13, 2024, 3:34 AM UTC

nostromo wrote: post #29

bawolff wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most people have bad takes outside of their field of expertise. I haven't seen her video on capitalism, but honestly no matter how horrible it is, i doubt it would change my view on her videos on physics.

Her take on capitalism is in line what most economists think though. It was only controversial amongst people outside of that field.

Nobody remotely agrees with the barter economy thing. She also completely omitted any mention of the political economy, while basically saying the solution to climate change is the political economy. Like, really, why does she think a carbon tax hasn't already been implemented? Political economy.