Can Time-travelling Higgs sabotage the LHC?

This post is motivated by recent paper by H. Nielsen and M. Ninomiya and related NewScientist article and New York Times essay, in which organized effort in finding of Higgs boson would be inherently predestined to become unsuccessful in laws of thermodynamics and quantum mechanics. Article proposes an explanation, why USA Congress stopped the funding for the USA's SSC in 1993, and why the LHC itself suffered an embarrassing meltdown shortly after starting up last year just by this aspect of time travel behavior. This story illustrates in such way, in contemporary science every nonsense can be promoted, providing its supported by formal math, thus evading the accusation from crackpotism, which obligued some formally thinking bloggers to vindicate this generally accepted difference between speculation and crackpottery. Anyway, as the result of ongoing discussion, arXiv has reclassified related papers to "less serious" General Physics section.

The problem of commonly used reasoning of physical models by abstract math and/or even computer simulations is indeed in violation of causal hierarchy, in which formal models are always based on predicate logics, not vice-versa. Therefore if underlying model is proven logically wrong, then the whole formal derivations based on it becomes wrong as well - as the destiny of some formally brilliant - though logically missunderstood models has demonstrated clearly (hollow Earth theory, geocentric model of epicycles, interpretation of luminiferous Aether model by Michellson-Morley experiments, etc..). In Aether theory Higgs model plays no significant model of casual background, because AWT assumes, there are infinitely many levels of space-time compactification, which manifests in real world by may complex high dimensional interactions inside of complex ecosystems, like Borneo jungle or human society. Constrained string theory models of twelve or twenty six dimensions cannot be considered as ultimate causal background of Universe from practical reasons, Higgs boson background of Standard Model the less, because observable world is apparently more rich and dimensional, then these models are considering.

In addition, Higgs model is too vague to be considered seriously, because it has more then single formulations: Higgs model in classical physics is based on different phenomena, then Higgs-Anderson model in boson condensates and its technical derivation consists in a mere reshuffling of degrees of freedom by transforming the Higgs Lagrangian in a gauge-invariant manner. Well known "hierarchy problem" implies, that quantum corrections can make the mass of the Higgs particle arbitrarily large, since virtual particles with arbitrarily large energies are allowed in quantum mechanics. Therefore in my opinion physicists are just mixing various concepts and mechanisms mutually at each level of physical model derivation from phenomenological to formal one, which leads effectively in prediction of many types of Higgs bosons of different rest mass and behavior, thus making such hypothesis untestable.

We are facing this conceptual confusion clearly at the moment, when mainstream physics presents some discrete predictions about Higgs boson. From Standard model follows, the product of Higgs boson Yukawa coupling to the left- and right-handed top quarks have nearly the same rest mass (173.1±1.3 GeV/c2) like those predicted for Higgs boson (178.0 ± 4.3 GeV/c2). We can compare the way, in which Higgs is supposed to be proved and detected at LHC:


And the way, in which formation of top-quark pairs was evidenced and detected already at Fermilab:



Because the observation agrees well both in Higgs mass, both in decay mechanism expected, it basically means, Higgs boson was observed already as a dilepton channel of top-quark pairs decay and no further research is necessary, investments into LHC experiments the less from perspective of evidence of this particular Higgs boson model - which indeed falsifies the above hypothesis of Nielsen & Ninomiya as well. Of course, conflict of many research interests with needs of society keeps these connections in secret more effectively, then every model of time-traveling Higgs thinkable can do.

This stance is nothing very new in contemporary physics, which often looks for evidence at incorrect places, while neglecting or even refusing clear evidence from dual view of AWT. We can compare it to search for event horizon during travel into black hole, while it's evident from more distant/general perspective, we crossed it already. The "unsuccessful" research for luminiferous Aether, while ignoring dense Aether model is the iconic case of this confusion, but we can find many other analogies here. For example, scientists are looking for evidence of Lorentz symmetry violation and hidden dimensions by violation of gravitational law, while ignoring Casimir force, or they trying to search for gravitational waves, while filtering out noise from detectors, just because they don't understand their subject at transparent, intuitive level.

Apparently, additional cost of research and general confusion of layman society is the logical consequence of this collective ignorance, while it keeps many scientists in their safe jobs and salaries in the same way, like mysticism of Catholic Church of medieval era - so I don't believe in comprehension and subsequent atonement in real time.

Higgs boson and Uroboros model of Universe

Uroboros is an ancient archetypal model of Universe related to implicit surfaces of topology, the Mobius strip and Klein bottle topology of holographic model of Universe in particular, which manifests at many levels of observable reality. In AWT it follows from geometry of causal energy spreading in transversal waves through nested Aether foam, where the same energy mediates both bulk volume properties, both surface properties of the same object. For example, if we get close to black hole, during passing its event horizon we would see, how previous universe generation has collapsed into many black hole horizon behind our spin and interior of black hole now appears like observable generation of universe with many black holes inside, the direct observation of black holes can therefore serve as an observational evidence of Uroboros geometry at cosmological scale.

The same geometry we can met with many dualities in human society, for example in mutual convergence of extreme leftwind and rigtwind ideas, as practiced by NDSAP party in Nazi Germany or bolshevist party in former Soviet Union, where employees got the same social status like their employers, at least proclamativelly. At Planck level scale the Uroboros model manifests in various supersymmetry phenomena, which follows from AdS/CFT correspondence (Mobius strip structure of electron and other spin 1/2 particles in particular) and in E8xE8 heterosis of Platonic solids, which can serve as 3D geometric models of causal dynamic triangulation of Aether foam (Lorentz/Wick rotation leads to isomorphism of root vector system of E8 Lie group in 3D, as Lisi Garret demonstrated).

Interesting consequence of T-duality in Uroboros model is isomorphism of most heavy/lightweight fermions and their supersymmetric bosons, the top quarks and Higgs boson in particular. From Standard model follows, the product of Higgs boson Yukawa coupling to the left- and right-handed top quarks have same rest mass (173.1±1.3 GeV/c²) and dilepton channel of decay and they're virtually indistinguishable each other. While top quark was observed in 1995 by the CDF and DØ experiments at Fermilab, it has no meaning to search for Higgs anymore at the moment, when bare top quark decay was identified (if something looks like a Higgs, walks like a Higgs, and quacks like a Higgs, it's just a product of top quark dilepton decay). In this point last bet of prof. Hawking that LHC won't find Higgs boson is dual to my conclusion, Higgs was observed already.

The more detailed interpretation of Higgs boson in AWT is difficult, because Higgs mechanism isn't primarily responsible for rest mass of particles in AWT. Higgs mechanism for giving mass to particles was actually first proposed in the context of solid state physics to explain how particle-like structures in metals can act as if they had an effective mass and it explains temperature dependence of conductivity in transition metals and semiconductors.

In particle physics, though, Higgs argument is designed to introduce the masses of the gauge bosons by a spontaneous breaking of the gauge symmetry of an additional field, the Higgs field. Of course this mechanism is a conceptually different from the way, in which condensate droplets of every particle environment are obtaining mass. And it has nothing to do with superconductivity also, as it takes place at room temperature, too. If Anderson–Higgs mechanism is related to background field in superconductivity such effect shouldn't be called a Higgs mechanism anymore - or we simply get two different kinds of Higgs bosons. Even worse, the technical derivation of the Higgs mechanism, consists in a mere reshuffling of degrees of freedom by transforming the Higgs Lagrangian in a gauge-invariant manner. This already raises serious doubts about the adequacy of the entire manoeuvre, since gauge transformations possess no real instantiations and no straightforward interpretation of the Higgs mechanism is tenable. IMO physicists are just mixing various concepts and mechanisms mutually at each level of physical model from phenomenological to formal one. Furthemore, a well known "hiearchy problem" implies, that quantum corrections can make the mass of the Higgs particle arbitrarily large, since virtual particles with arbitrarily large energies are allowed in quantum mechanics.

The case, when scientists are looking for phenomena, which is known for years already - just from opposite side - isn't new at all in context of AWT. For example the search for gravitational waves (CMB radiation), supersymmetry (observation of tetraneutron, pentaquark, dimuon event and other phenomena) Lorentz symmetry violation (gravitational lensing, GZK limit and other phenomena) or evidence of hidden dimensions (Casimir force and related phenomena) is the situation of the same category. For scientists is quite normal to search for violation of relativity by quantum mechanics and vice versa, while they're know already, these theories are inconsistent mutually up to level, their predictions differs in two hundred orders of magnitude.

Such situation just reflects the level of conceptual confusion, which penetrates whole contemporary physics. But we should realize, scientists as such have no strong motivation to solve contemporary situation, on the contrary - confusion enables them to keep their information monopoly, to broaden their RE-search and to ask money for another grants from taxes - only layman society is who is paying here. I suppose, such situation would appear unbelievable for our descendants - but this is exactly the situation, we are experiencing by now. Scientists are shamans of modern era and they're eating their own tails by such ignorant approach.