>>12783529>>12783543jon, let me give you some facts.
1) there are literally hundreds of papers on the higgs coupling which confirm the standard model predictions that it’s couplings to other particles are proportional to mass (with the reminder that you need to remember loop corrections when you are doing QFT). this amounts to many many pieces of evidence that show the “higgs boson” in question is doing exactly what you would expect from the higgs mechanism
2) the higgs mechanism requires the particle in question to take on a nonzero vev (it needs to be able to find the bottom of a mexican hat where the bottom is nonzero.) if the spin were anything besides 0, then the vev would violate lorentz invariance because vector or sponsor particles with a nonzero vev pick out a direction in space they are pointing. then if you boost along that direction, the vev must length contract thus making the masses of particles vary if you are moving. this is nonsense. so spin != 0 is incapable of explaining the well-confirmed higgs mechanism.
3) particles with higher spin than spin 1 lead to big issues in standard QFT. spin 2 is allowed in quantum gravity theories but higher spins are very problematic without very careful cancellations between an infinite tower of higher spins. in the context of QFT, introducing spins higher than 2 leads to infinitely many unknown parameters in the theory which destroys most peoples’ notion of a successful theory.
4) spin 2 hypotheses for the higgs have been ruled out experimentally, in multiple analyses, at 5 sigma or more greater confidence level.
i honestly don’t want to argue with you. it is cope for you to try and argue this. if you just admitted to yourself that you are/were wrong you might gain some respect maybe and you might actually grow somehow internally, maybe you could grow out of your very unhealthy mental state and actually contribute something. mistakes are how you learn
