As a professional physics researcher, I, Andrew Beckwith, congratulate CERN on its invaluable dedication to the solution of the Higgs-boson problem. This note will not be to scold the CERN researchers but to outline the very hard work ahead as to a solution of the TOTAL Higgs-boson problem, which needs to be carried through in an organized manner. First of all, I will review the history of the Higgs mechanism for spontaneous symmetry breaking and what is known as to outline as to the formation of mass problem in the electro weak case: In doing this line of inquiry, we look at the additional fourth order term added to form a modified Lagrangian term:

1. Summary of The Importance of
the Higgs Research Results by
the CERN Scientists and Why
the Problem is Much Harder to
Fully Master Than What
People Think; i.e., Spontaneous
Symmetry Breaking For a
Particle Lasting 10 to the
Minus Six Power Seconds, or
Less.
e M O T I O N ! R E P O R T S . c o m
7 4 W . L o n g L a k e R d .
S u i t e 2 0 1 B l o o m f i e l d H i l l s , M I
4 8 3 0 4
6 3 1 - 9 0 9 - 7 2 4 5 ( N Y )
E m a i l : a b e c k w i t h @ u h . e d u
7 / 4 / 2 0 1 2
Dr. Andrew Walcott Beckwith, Chongqing
University Department of Physics, with
Research Analyst Myron D. Stokes
“As a professional physics researcher, I, Andrew
Beckwith, congratulate CERN on its invaluable dedication
to the solution of the Higgs-boson problem. This note will
not be to scold the CERN researchers but to outline the
very hard work ahead as to a solution of the TOTAL Higgs-
boson problem, which needs to be carried through in an
organized manner.”

2. Summary of The Importance of the Higgs Research Results by the
CERN Scientists and Why the Problem is Much Harder to Fully
Master Than What People Think; i.e. Spontaneous Symmetry
Breaking For a Particle Lasting 10 to the Minus Six Power Seconds,
or Less.
Dr. Andrew Beckwith, in Collaboration with Research Analyst Myron D. Stokes:
Artist’s Concept of Big Bang Image: Deviantart.com
As a professional physics researcher, I, Andrew Beckwith, congratulate CERN on its
invaluable dedication to the solution of the Higgs-boson problem. This note will not be to

3. scold the CERN researchers but to outline the very hard work ahead as to a solution of the
TOTAL Higgs-boson problem, which needs to be carried through in an organized manner.
First of all, I will review the history of the Higgs mechanism for spontaneous symmetry
breaking and what is known as to outline as to the formation of mass problem in the electro
weak case: In doing this line of inquiry, we look at the additional fourth order term added
to form a modified Lagrangian term:
2
2 2 4
1 1 1
2 2 4
L
x
 
 

     
 
 

 
(1)
The minimum of the potential given in (1) occurs when the derivative of the potential with
respect to the scalar field  is zero, i.e.
2 2 4
1 1
2 4
V  
    (2)
Such that
 
2 2
0
 
    (3)
So then the case for a minimum of the potential V , with V minimum set as when V has a non-
zero constant value for its minimum value, instead of V = 0, when one has a minimum value of
V when 2
0
  , so that one has
1/2
2


 
   
 
 
(4)

4. Having 0
  is a false vacuum solution, instead we work directly with (4) so that
so that instead of V== 0 ( false vacuum), we have, when (4) is for the true vacuum
4
4
V  
 
(5)
In the case of the electro weak we substitute in
 
v x

  
(6)
for (1) and (2) above, obtaining
2
4
2 2 3
1 1
2 2 4
L v v const
x
 
   
   
  
     
   
 
 
    
 
(7)
Comparing (7) with the 2nd
term in L as a mass term, with (1) gives us the mass term which if before the
shift we work with in (1) such that
2
v


 
      
 
(8)
We isolate from (7) that there is a mass term which has a value of
2 2
2 2
m v
 
   (9)
This is spontaneous symmetry breaking. It happens all the time in physics.

5. The basis for symmetry breaking involves a true versus a false vacuum, in physics: Very difficult to
duplicate conditions for such arising in CERN.
Getting mass formed this way, for the Higgs formation is a fantastic feat when 6
10
seconds are involved.
By necessity, considering the 6
10
seconds involved, plus the fantastic heat involved will mean that
imprecision will be rampant. Saying that one has a particular MASS for the Higgs, considering the time
duration, 6
10
seconds or less, and also the heat values involved will require decades of work. Note that
Higgs himself derived these sorts of procedures and extended it to a Higgs-boson 50 years ago and to this
day he is overwhelmed by the attention given to this construct when he was a very young Graduate
student. And note the ratio values obtained by (4) will be part of the experimental considerations of the
Higgs, in terms of a true vacuum.
What Myron Stokes and others have done has been to super impose a certain subset of results 10 days ago
with the announcement of the Higgs discovery, just recently. As submitted by the Author of this
discussion, the real physics begins with (4) above as a ratio expression, and then the mass, as in (9)
Both Myron and I congratulate CERN on a magnificent technical achievement, as to beginning to delve
into the formation of mass, as given by (9). We submit though, especially in lieu of the fact that the
difference between the false and true vacuum results comes about due to (4) for the true vacuum as a ratio
result, that CERN has BEGUN to work developing a fantastic achievement in future astro-particle
physics . We do wish to point though to the fact that the authors 10 days ago, gave evidence of where to
go, and that this should be part of the general record.
Andrew Beckwith, Myron D. Stokes – 4 July, 2012

6. Postulated Big Bang Expansion Image: Wikipedia
Related and relevant papers to this discussion:
http://asimov52.files.wordpress.com/2011/09/sanmarino-a-beckwith5a-sept2st.pdf
http://www.slideshare.net/GHHLLC2/kk-graviton-redojuly52012
http://www.slideshare.net/GHHLLC2/hadronic1z-1