From: edprochak@gmail.com   
      
   Thanks to all for your interesting comments.   
      
   On Friday, July 13, 2018 at 9:34:50 PM UTC-4, Gregor Scholten wrote:   
   > Edward Prochak wrote:   
   []   
   >   
   > What is a crucial difference between the Higgs field and an aether is   
   > that an aether would define a preferred frame of reference, since one   
   > could find out whether oneself is moving with respece to the aether or   
   > not, whereas the Higgs field does not. The Higgs field is   
   > Lorentz-invariant, it looks the same in all frames of reference. So, it   
   > is not defined if one is moving with respect to the Higgs field or not.   
   >   
   >   
   > > Aether was a fixed reference frame   
   > > Higgs particles move(?)   
   >   
   > If Higgs particles permeated the all of space (what they do not), they   
   > would define a preferred frame of reference, like an aether would do.   
   > Even if they moved with respect to each other, there would be a frame of   
   > reference defined in which their average velocities would be minimal.   
   >   
   > But since it is the Higgs field that permeates all of space and not the   
   > Higgs bosons, there is no preferred frame defined.   
   >   
      
   yes I know the Aether was a preferred reference frame   
   but now I see HOW the Higgs is not such a frame. Thanks.   
      
   >   
   > > For example, is the Higgs related to the   
   > > relativistic length contraction?   
   >   
   > The field equation for the Higgs field is Lorentz-invariant, i.e. it is   
   > related to Lorentz transformation, and by this, to Lorentz contraction.   
   >   
   > The Higgs field is not responsible for the Lorentz Contraction of   
   > material bodies, though.   
   >   
   >   
   > > relativistic mass increase?   
   >   
   > First, we should note the relativistic mass increase is an obsoleted   
   > concept. According to modern terminology, the mass of a body does not   
   > increase when the body is moving. The energy increases (and approaches   
   > infinity for v -> c), but not the mass. So, what we call mass today is   
   > what was called rest mass in the early days of Special Relativity.   
   >   
   > Second, even if we use the obsoleted terminology of relativistic mass   
   > increase, the Higgs mechanism is responsibly for the rest mass only, not   
   > for mass increase.   
   >   
   > Let's go more into mathematical detail. Let m denote the (rest) mass of   
   > a particle, p its momentum und E its energy, then we have   
   >   
   > E^2 = (mc^2)^2 + (pc)^2   
   >   
   > What Higgs mechanismus is responsible for is the term (mc^2)^2. One   
   > could re-write this term to (h phi)^2, where phi is the local value of   
   > the Higgs field and h the coupling constant between the considered   
   > particle and the Higgs field.   
   >   
   > What was called mass increase in earlier days was that one defined a   
   > dynamic mass m' that obeys E = m' c^2, so that   
   >   
   > E^2 = (m' c^2)^2 = (mc^2)^2 + (pc)^2   
   >   
   > <=> m' = (m^2 + (p/c)^2)^(1/2)   
   >   
   > So, the Higgs mechanism relevant only in that way that it generates a   
   > non-zero (rest) mass m that can be increased (according to the obsoleted   
   > terminology).   
      
   AGAIN thanks to all the posters from some interesting information.   
   I have  a copy of a book on particle physics and hope to go   
   through that. It may take me some time though!  8^)   
      
   Ed   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)