well, it turns out that, http://www.sci-news.com/physics/science-techni-higgs-discovery-higgs-boson-02266.html i could explain why but i don't have any cred. i did though predict this when it was first "discovered"
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
These authors (I actually know two of them) are stating that there are other hypotheses as the one of the Higgs boson that would work as well. That's true. However, there are also hundreds of other hypotheses, and there is no way to experimentally disentangle any of those today (some of them being however very unlikely). That is what is called in the field the beyond the Standard Model field of research (which is my main field by the way).
All those theories are theories that are more fundamental than the Standard Model. However, once you take the limit of the energy regime probed so far, they all give the Standard Model as a result. That is why we cannot tell which one is likely and which one is not.
Now what we call the Higgs could be fundamentally something else, or could not be. What matters is that it behaves like a Higgs, acts like a Higgs, feels like a Higgs and smells like a Higgs. Whatever is the correct fundamental theory of nature, at the energy regimes we are probing today, it must encompass some object (elementary or not) that can be seen as a Standard Model Higgs boson.
My vote is the the higgs field is a settled matter. ;)