Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

Can the Higgs boson give believers their multiverse? Shot and chaser


Shot: The Higgs ought to be three times as heavy as it is. So…

We’re not sure why it isn’t heavier, but a new paper lays out a fascinating solution. According to physicists Raffaele Tito D’Agnolo of Université Paris Saclay in France and Daniele Teresi of CERN, the problem can be resolved if, at the time of the Big Bang, the Universe consisted of many universes – a multiverse.

Not only do the physicists’ calculations solve the mass of the Higgs boson, they also solve a seemingly unrelated problem in the Standard Model: the preservation of symmetry in the strong force that binds the elementary particles that form all normal matter.

The team’s model starts the Universe as a multitude of universes. Each universe in this multiverse has a different mass for the Higgs boson – some quite heavy, and some very light.

Michelle Starr, “Mind-Bending New Multiverse Scenario Could Explain a Strange Higgs Boson Feature” at ScienceAlert (February 4, 2022)

Chaser: There is simply no empirical evidence for the existence of a multiverse, as opposed to “If there were a multiverse, it would solve such-and-such a problem:

The Multiverse is everywhere these days…

But is there any real empirical scientific basis for it? Is there good reason to believe that this Multiverse idea, which emerged from the frontiers of science, is true? In other words, do you live in a Multiverse?

The answer for better for worse is no. There is no empirically grounded scientific reason to believe there is such a thing as a Multiverse of parallel realities. In fact, the only time the Multiverse appears in scientific theories is as a bug rather than a feature. If you have a Multiverse in your cosmic model, it is probably evidence that your model is failing in some important way.

Adam Frank, “There is no empirical, scientific evidence for the Multiverse” at Big Think (February 3, 2022)

The obvious difficulty is that the multiverse drags in inconceivable complexity in order to solve comparatively common, minor issues of the sort that science always faces. People don’t think of that approach as a solution unless they have a vested philosophical and emotional interest in the idea.

You may also wish to read: The multiverse is science’s assisted suicide.

The basic idea is that of John Wheeler and what he termed "geons." Let's remember that we get a lot of names for stuff from him. He was fascinated by what would happen to 'space' if a huge amount of energy was present--more like energy density. His thought was that space would then have to be curved. If space is curved enough (that is, if the energy density is high enough), then a "particle" might form, a "geon." I don't know if we will EVER be able to get beyond the 'geon' particle: that is, it would 'effectively' be 'irreducible.' So, at some point, as we get down to smaller and smaller distances, all we might see are "pixels." PaV
The Dirac Delta Function tells us that a function has a value at a particular point in space but that the value of the that function outside of that one point is zero everywhere. Now, how far does this go down? No one really knows because the length scale (energy scale) of physics is limited. But let's say we go down the the Planck scale (or even lower) and we find that there each "point" behaves like that Dirac Delta Function. Well, this tells us that 'each' point is 'independent' of one another. Now, just add this simple (yet unknowable) assumption: EACH point is the source of an 'infinite' amount of energy pulsating into the space of other 'points' at infinitesimal moments of time. What do we have? A multiverse! And this view, I believe, would solve many problems in physics. Yes, we live in a 'multiverse,' but one with which we're very familiar and that we know as our universe. PaV
Weighing the angels on a pinhead. polistra
"If you have a Multiverse in your cosmic model, it is probably evidence that your model is failing in some important way." Bingo! bornagain77

Leave a Reply