### gMOD and the LHC

I've been asking my associates, who are more knowledgeable about Heim Theory, what impact the experiments being conducted at the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) would have on testing the validity of Heim Theory. Remember that Droscher and Hauser's Extended Heim Theory has been the best theoretical model of Tajmar's gravity generation results.

The LHC experiments include efforts to find supersymmetry particles as well as the Higgs boson, which is suggested as imparting mass to all other subatomic particles. However, Heim Theory is not dependent upon the Higgs mechanism for the concept of mass. According to hdeasy, a frequent poster on PhysOrg Forum, Heim Theory posits that mass is caused by a six dimensional cyclic process or flux. If this flux is open, you have virtual particles. If it closes to form a 6-D circuit, it gives a real particle whose mass is given by this 6-D flux.

No Higgs particle is needed as it is another mechanism for assigning mass. Note that of the six dimensions involved in assigning mass, three are like time. The other three are the familiar space dimensions (length, breadth, height).

Heim theory is based on quantizing space, in 2-D quanta of area (Planck length)*(Planck length) called metrons. This aspect is similar to Loop Quantum Gravity (LQG), a theory gaining acceptance over string theory. Find the Higgs and that is bad news for Heim Theory.

A Wikipedia article on Heim Theory which is viewed as a reliable non-technical discussion by Heim adherents, states *"confirmation of supersymmetry ... would falsify all existing versions of Heim theory, which are mutually exclusive with supersymmetry."* If results of the LHC experiments find no Higgs or superspartners (a feature of most versions of string theory) then that spells the end for the Higgs mechanism of mass and many versions of string theory.

The remaining alternative theories to Higgs and accounting for the breaking of electroweak symmetry (including Heim Theory) would gain new attention and scrutiny.

How likely is it that this long-suspected Higgs particle will not be found? Who else thinks that not finding the Higgs might be a more interesting outcome? Physicist Stephen Hawking for one.

Hawking told BBC Radio he'd bet US$100 that the LHC won't find that tiny Higgs particle. While Hawking said the LHC's conditions should theoretically allow it to be discovered, he said it'd be "much more exciting" if it didn't -- leading to his wager.

Professor Higgs, 79, who first postulated the existence of the particle 44 years ago, disagrees in a recent interview. *“My understanding is he puts together theories in particle physics with gravity... in a way which no theoretical particle physicist would believe is the correct theory. From a particle physics, quantum theory point of view, you have to put a lot more than just gravity into the theory to have a consistent theory and I don’t think Stephen has done that. I am very doubtful about his calculations.*

©2008 Gregory Daigle