It was touted as God particle, the one that can explain the origin of the world. But, Higgs Boson, which was found on July 4, 2012, is neither related to God nor can it completely explain the formation of the world, Prof. Sridhara Rao Dasu, said.
Professor of Physics at the University of Wisconsin, US, Prof. Dasu is a member of the CMS team that is hunting for this elusive particle in the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) located in Europe. He was delivering a lecture ‘Discovering Higgs Boson’ at the B.M. Birla Science Centre here on Saturday.
Physicists have been speculating about the Higgs Field for the last 50 years and with the July 4 discovery, scientific community can finally come to a conclusion that there is a possibility of its existence, he pointed out.
According to theory, the Higgs Field gives mass to electrons and understanding it can lead to vital clues to realise the possible structure of matter just after the Big Bang.
“However, the July 4 data only shows the possibility of Higgs Boson’s presence, and it will take further research to confirm its existence,” Prof. Dasu cautioned. One way to prove the existence of the Higgs Field is to confirm the presence of the Higgs Particle, and the data revealed so far is in accordance with theoretical predictions, he explained.
The only problem with identifying the Higgs Particle is that it is rarely produced and is obscured by very large number of other interactions that take place at the LHC.
But how do we study subatomic particles? Prof. Dasu explained the phenomena lucidly. “Imagine two billiard balls colliding at normal speeds. As a result both the balls will bounce back. But when the same balls collide at greater speeds, the result will be that they will smash each other. Similarly, when two electrons or protons travelling at the speed of light collide, they smash each other, and the result will be a large number of particles,” he said. These particles are then photographed and studied to understand their behaviour, he added
This article has been corrected for factual errors