iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Gerald Stanford Guralnik

GET UPDATES FROM Gerald Stanford Guralnik
 

The Inside Story of a Higgs Boson Theory

Posted: 08/14/2012 1:01 pm

Physicists at CERN reported Aug. 1 that they are even more certain than they were at the historic July 4 announcement that the particle they recently observed is the "Higgs boson." I was fortunate to attend CERN's initial announcement of results from the two incredible and very beautiful sets of experiments suggesting that after nearly 50 years, the search for this elusive particle was successful.

The particle was hypothesized in a radical theory in 1964, and as I marveled at the precision of the experimental results, I reflected on my part in constructing that theory. The adventure had some wonderful, scary and even embarrassing moments.

In 1962 my Ph.D. thesis adviser, Walter Gilbert, suggested that I think about some new theoretical ideas of Yoichiro Nambu and collaborators. Nambu demonstrated that one could find unsuspected solutions to equations believed to be useful in explaining elementary particle phenomena. These solutions are called "spontaneous symmetry breaking" solutions because they show less symmetry than the original equations. Nambu's solutions include a zero mass particle, which are always required in the case of spontaneous symmetry breaking. This result, called the Nambu Goldstone theorem, was startling! It had been impossible to calculate an absolute mass as an exact result of a non-trivial theory.

The theorem posed a problem because one massless particle, the photon, has been experimentally observed Shortly after I started studying Nambu's papers, J.D. Bjorken proposed a modified version of Nambu's original theory where the massless particle could be identified with the photon. His equations differed from the conventional ones that describe how matter and light interact but I was able to show after some minor modifications that Bjorken's were correct.

This is where life started getting interesting. Bjorken's new theory agreed with conventional theory and rightly required that the photon have zero mass. No one had yet proved that the usual theory of electromagnetism exactly required zero mass photons. In fact, Julian Schwinger had found a case where an electromagnetic-like theory did not have a massless particle. This bothered me immensely. Something was very wrong if an "ersatz" electromagnetic theory required that the photon be massless but the generally used theory did not.

There must be an equivalent to the Nambu Goldstone theorem for normal electromagnetism that guaranteed that a massless photon, I thought. I searched for it and, thinking that I found it, proceeded to add an embarrassingly wrong chapter to my Ph.D. thesis. Sidney Coleman who was famous for his rapid mind and biting wit caught the error in my final exam. We removed the chapter and I passed the exam.

In the fateful year of 1964 I received a National Science Foundation postdoctoral fellowship and traveled with my new wife, Susan, to Imperial College in London. It turned out to be a magnificent social and physics experience.

Imperial was probably the best place to work on high energy theoretical physics then. It was filled with brilliant physicists and had a continuous stream of famous physics visitors. Paul Matthews and Abdus Salam led the high energy theory group. I soon began discussing physics with many younger people including Tom Kibble and Raymond Streater. Kibble and I became constant lunch companions often discussing topics related to my thesis. We were sure that I had only touched the surface.

I remained obsessed with finding a proof that the photon of traditional electromagnetic theory must have zero mass. In April I submitted a paper to Physical Review Letters that contained many new insights into the phenomena of spontaneous symmetry breaking and a new proof showing that the photon has zero mass. I realized a few days later that the paper had an extremely subtle error. Recognizing it was profound because it clarified that for broken symmetry quantum theories related to electromagnetism, the assumptions needed to prove the Nambu Goldstone theorem were wrong. These theories did not always require massless particles! I intended to revise the paper when the journal returned it, but because of unlikely events including postal strikes I never saw the manuscript again. PRL published it August 24. The paper was the first of the series of papers that laid the cornerstone of the "Standard Model" by leading to the unified theory of electromagnetic and weak interactions and the prediction of the Higgs Boson.

Almost immediately after understanding how to escape the Nambu Goldstone theorem, I realized how to construct a specific new example by finding a symmetry breaking solution of electromagnetism interacting with charged scalar (spinless) matter. This solution described an entirely new phase (just as steam, liquid and ice are phases of water) of the normal electromagnetic equations. This work was done in collaboration with Kibble and Carl Hagen from the University of Rochester who had been my friend and collaborator since our undergraduate days at MIT.

The results that we found were unprecedented. While the familiar solution had a massless photon and a charged massive scalar particle, this new broken symmetric solution had a massive unit spin particle and a single scalar particle of ultimately undetermined mass which is now called the Higgs boson. Gone was the pesky Nambu Goldstone massless scalar particle but given my previous errors, we were in no hurry to publish our results. This time we worked out every minute detail and applied every internal consistency check. I even traveled to Italy's Lake Como to consult my thesis advisor Walter Gilbert, who was giving summer school lectures there. We finally submitted our paper to PRL with the proof of the general mechanism to avoid the Nambu Goldstone theorem (the only work to have this) and the special example. We were surprised to discover that two very different but related papers, with parts of the example, one by Englert and Brout and the other by Higgs also existed. All three papers appeared in the same volume of PRL in 1964.

Initially, to the extent that these papers were noticed at all, they were not well received. An essential tool used in particle physics is symmetry. The alphabet soup of observed elementary particles is simplified by the experimental observation of a high degree of symmetry in the behavior of groups of particles. To explain this, the basic equations of most physical theories incorporate large amounts of symmetry. The solutions we proposed had less symmetry and violated a special symmetry called "gauge symmetry." This was new and made other physicists profoundly uncomfortable. Werner Heisenberg (Nobel Prize, Physics, 1932), one of the most important physicists of the 20th century made it clear to me in the summer of 1965, at a conference in his honor, that he thought these ideas were junk.

I thought that this was probably the end of my nascent career as a theoretical physicist, but thankfully I took a postdoctoral job at the University of Rochester where Hagen was about to become a professor. There, another great 20th century physicist Robert Marshak told me that if I wished to survive in physics that I must stop thinking about this sort of problem and move on. I wisely obeyed, but I was thrilled a few years later when Steve Weinberg and then Abdus Salam used our mechanism and a generalization of our simple example to build the unified model of weak and electromagnetic interactions and later, with Sheldon Glashow, received Nobel prizes.

I have worked on many different problems, all of them fascinating and deeply involving, but none, so far, have evolved to acquire the fundamental importance of my early adventures with symmetry breaking and mass.

We have many more questions to answer, particularly many currently pressing ones like how gravity fits together with all of this. We need to identify and characterize the "dark matter" and "dark energy" that makes up a majority of our universe. We have hopes that an idea called Supersymmetry will be confirmed. The apparent discovery of the boson opens up new doors for those inquiries.

My hope is that as the puzzle continues to be unraveled that some of the wonder and excitement that we physicists have felt for decades will continue to be felt across the world the way it was on July 4.

 
FOLLOW SCIENCE
Physicists at CERN reported Aug. 1 that they are even more certain than they were at the historic July 4 announcement that the particle they recently observed is the "Higgs boson." I was fortunate to...
Physicists at CERN reported Aug. 1 that they are even more certain than they were at the historic July 4 announcement that the particle they recently observed is the "Higgs boson." I was fortunate to...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 16
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
photo
Syllogizer
Barely Left of Pobedonostsev
12:11 PM on 08/21/2012
The bit about Heisenberg calling 'junk' a theory that eventually won out was a particularly interesting tidbit. Too many people treat physicists of his caliber as infallible, it is refreshing to hear such anecdotes.
04:41 AM on 08/17/2012
Nice profoundly scientific paper. My own contribution on the physical reality of the cosmos has been my relativity paper connecting SR and GR into one equation of time dilation proportionality which was accepted for publication in SAJS: 104, 221-224, 2008 within 90 hr after being okayed by an FRS. So I like your remark about one salient crucial missing link being how gravity fits into all this. This something where I am confident I can answer. My own feeling is that symmetry breaking, a pervasive and spectacularly important feature of the universe, physical, chemical and biological, needs to be better understood. It is something, I suspect, more fundamental than what is now realised. The theory of everything that many talk about lies somewhere around it. It wont be an all encompassing magical thing, but a malleable concept around which lies many explanations of the reality of the universe. In this vein the Higgs mechanism of mass generation will be shown not to be what it is believed to be but something different, of much greater importance for the elucidation of the reality of the universe and of its origin. I can say a lot more but maybe we will cross each others path one day and we will talk. I happen to combine both a cosmolgical and a biological mind and this can be an asset.
02:41 PM on 08/16/2012
"We have hopes that an idea called Supersymmetry will be confirmed. The apparent discovery of the boson opens up new doors for those inquiries." Actually, the plain truth of the matter is that the Higgs data provides compelling evidence that Supersymmetry is a failed theory, or at the very least in need of a complete revision. It is odd that you would "spin" the data to the opposite of what it shows, and, indeed, connecting "dark matter" by association to the Higgs data fails gain to reflect that the latest data shows less and less of a connection of the actual data at LHC to dark matter theories. So here is a a very basic question, is this science or propaganda? Don't we need real science?
photo
oneeasyrider
E=mc2: From light you exist
02:46 AM on 08/18/2012
I agree with you. Found it strange to see a feeble attempt at the end of an otherwise interesting essay to connect HB with dark matter. Dark matter exhibits it's effects on our barely 4% observable universe but in every other way exists in no way like observable matter. While we do observe effect of dark matter, clearly it's origin is not part of our physical reality. More likely, dark matter and dark energy are the sum of nearly infinite realities existing in differing time frames while overlapping outside of our own reality. While we're constrained by time...not so for the larger universe.
01:39 PM on 08/21/2012
The story of dark matter and supersymmetry and the so-called Higgs boson are not necessarily divorced from each other. You have to remember that there is THE Higgs boson and then there are other "Higgs bosons". The one we're all talking about now is a confirmed part of the Standard Model, but many other could exist as relics of even higher broken symmetries.

The way they're all connected is this: dark matter is a particle and as such *should* have some underlying symmetric group structure. This symmetry could be incorporated with the known Standard Model symmetries into an even bigger symmetry group that eventually gets broken down (in the very early universe). When that bigger group (often called a Grand Unified Theory or GUT) gets broken, it will almost certainly bring broken-symmetry particles, or "Higgs bosons".

While it's true that current data from the LHC (in particular the LHCb experiment) have pared down the possible parameter space open to supersymmetry, almost no one in particle theory has changed their position on it.

So the upshot is that the Standard Model is known to not be complete, supersymmetry still provides the best framework for extending the SM and if there is one single theory that combines the SM with dark matter (the existence of such a theory is the real "propaganda" in this whole debate), then there will almost certainly be more "Higgs particles" associated with the symmetries that broke when e.g. dark matter and the SM split.
photo
SeptimusDSX
Always question the obvious.
03:53 PM on 08/15/2012
To the author:

Did you speculate how things might have turned out if you had ignored the advice to move on to something else?
photo
MeggaWhat
Tax Mitt
12:07 PM on 08/21/2012
I wanted to ask that also.
02:23 PM on 08/22/2012
Kinda like thinking about the future of physics, just before Einstein.

BTW, no one can figure out why time has a direction. I've wondered if, looking at string theory, there are dimensions tightly curled as to be undetectable, our time dimension is, like space, simply uncurling.
photo
FromBeyondUrAnus
My 214th fan will be forever cursed!
12:55 AM on 08/15/2012
This is VERY exciting stuff!
10:24 PM on 08/14/2012
If you combined every article on the Higgs boson I've read in the NYT Science section and every other online article I found, you still wouldn't come anywhere close to the amount of useful information that is found in this article. Thank you for using legit physics "speak" and not backing away from actually trying to explain what was going on (even though it is still for a general audience). I can use this to backtrack and find the research papers and text books I need to make better sense of what this all means.
09:37 PM on 08/14/2012
the same scientists who don't believe in God are looking for the "God particle". how ironic...
10:25 PM on 08/14/2012
The so called "god particle" was a terrible comment made by a singe physicist. Get over it already.
10:36 PM on 08/14/2012
cry me a river...your comment is just as terrible as their's.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Stoopid American
Trooth, justice, and the American way ...
11:33 PM on 08/17/2012
Only non-scientists call it that, friend. Scientists call it the Higgs boson.