I have avoided so far the use of the term Higgs boson—the analog in the electroweak theory of the η. Certainly, Higgs deserves the credit for first exhibiting the mechanism in the context of scalar electrodynamics. But as I have tried to show, it took other people to make it work. The Higgs boson is what is being looked for at CERN. If they find it, we shall all be happy and relieved. And if not? I am reminded of a story about Einstein. He had just received a telegram with the news that the eclipse expeditions had confirmed his general relativity prediction about the Sun bending starlight. He was very pleased with himself and showed the telegram to one of his students, Ilse Rosenthal-Schneider. She asked him what he would have done if the telegram had contained the news that the experiments disagreed with the theory. He replied, “Da könt mir halt der lieber Gott leid tun—die theorie stimmt doch. (Then I would have been sorry for the dear Lord. The theory is right).”
What It Means
This is a placeholder explanation generated by the low-overhead model. It interprets "I have avoided so far the use of the term Higgs boson—the analog in the electroweak theory of the η. Certainly, Higgs deserves the credit for first exhibiting the mechanism in the context of scalar electrodynamics. But as I have tried to show, it took other people to make it work. The Higgs boson is what is being looked for at CERN. If they find it, we shall all be happy and relieved. And if not? I am reminded of a story about Einstein. He had just received a telegram with the news that the eclipse expeditions had confirmed his general relativity prediction about the Sun bending starlight. He was very pleased with himself and showed the telegram to one of his students, Ilse Rosenthal-Schneider. She asked him what he would have done if the telegram had contained the news that the experiments disagreed with the theory. He replied, “Da könt mir halt der lieber Gott leid tun—die theorie stimmt doch. (Then I would have been sorry for the dear Lord. The theory is right).”" in the context of "(January 2011), "A question of mass", American Journal of Physics 79 no: 1, pages: 25–31, DOI:
