Movement through space is resisted by the field and that resistance creates mass.
But how could this explain inertia?
Hi,
Good point. Probably requires some form of relativity?
After all, they have not really defined their "movement" to
my satisfaction. Even with their pretty graphics. And it
is certainly above my current knoweldge level. Aether
revisited? Let's see, if you are in a Higgs field and that
imparts mass to a particlal, how would it do that without
movement? The field woud be moving relative to it?
Sounds like the layman's explaination they use is
simplified beyond actual usefulness. So, how much effort
is required to obtain the equivalent to a Ph.D in physics?
Probably requires the field energy to be potential rather
than kinetic. And they do mention something like that at
times. (That the lowest energy level of the Higgs field is
non-zero.) (Which renders one of the pretty graphic
depictions on Nova a contradiction, as it shows movement...)
But that seems to just put things in a different coordinate
system and does not provide an intuitive insight (to me
at least).
If I find a computer that can navigate their revamped web
site (ew), I think I will listen to the segment on the Science
Friday show that discussed the announcement again. It
seemed to make sense at the time.
Cheers,
Steve N.