08/10/2013 Newsnight


Jeremy Paxman talks to the former head of the English Defence League, Tommy Robinson. Plus, the co-founder of Jimmy Chu, press regulation and Heinz Wolff on the Higgs Boson.

Similar Content

Browse content similar to 08/10/2013. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



He might have a reputation for noise and bluster, but this news was kept


very quiet indeed. After four years trying to run the English Defence


League, the man who calls himself Tommy Robinson is now suddenly


walking away. He sat between two former Muslim Jihadists to make his


point, that the EDL is becoming too extreme and loud and violent


demonstrations are just not working. I am asking all my supporters who


followed me to put faith in the decision we are making, and follow


in, I don't believe, street protests and the way it is going is the way


in, I don't believe, street protests forward. I believe an opportunity


has to be given to see if this can progress. It can progress to be a


debate, instead of being on the street, can be had an arena that it


is supposed to be had. It was this demonstration in 2009 that changed


everything for Tommy Robinson. Muslim protesters shouted insults as


the royal anningian regiment marched through Luton town centre. Robinson


led a counter demonstration that eventually turned into the EDL. The


group has no normal joining procedures and no membership list.


Its street protests often descend into violence and arrests. But


people who watch the EDL say Robinson is in fact one of its less


extreme members. He has been followed by a camera crew as he was


brought together with modderate Muslims. The vast majority of the


people in this country would want Muslims. The vast majority of the


the burqa banned. In the process of making the film to be broadcast on


the BBC this Ute um he was introduced to the anti-extremist


group the quill yam foundation. They have demonstrated a level of courage


because let's not forget there are elements within the EDL that will be


furious right now. They will consider them traitors. I know that


because there were elements within my movement that considered me a


traitor. The reaction from EDL supporters is


hard to measure at this stage. On internet forums there are plenty of


comments for support for Robinson. Many of disbelief.


In some ways Tommy Robinson is a spokesperson for a number of


regional English Defence Leagues. That, however, is a problem. It is


far easier for the police to contain and to control demonstrations that


the English Defence League has when there is one leader and one group.


Actually if the group fragments and turns into a large number of


smaller, sometimes quite nasty groups, it's going to be far harder


to police. As for Tommy Robinson, there is now talk of leading a new


political group. The question for many is whether that will just be a


watered down version of the English Defence League or it can be


something different, genuinely non-violent and genuinely


non-racist. Tommy Robinson is here. When did you decide that you had to


leave? I decided in February. I spent 18 weeks on Her Majesty's


pleasure and was in solitary confinement and it was the best


thing that happened to me. I had a long time think where I was going


and where the movement was going. When I came out of prison, I see the


organisation, elements of the organisation, fringe elements on the


outskirts had been welcomed back. I had battled to keep racists out of


this movement, and they were invited back and I felt let down by the


people in the organisation that were in positions, the same people


calling me a traitor now, in positions that invited Nazis to


stand with them in the face. It is my face that is up for this. I have


to be true to myself. I despies Nazis and I despies racism. That was


one thing, I had made that decision, I hadn't left. What was the EDL,


what is the EDL if it is not racist. I want to say a personal thank you


to supporters of the English Defence League, because it is become my


life. I see this as a massive step forward in the fight against Islamic


extremism and far-right extremism. The EDL is a collective group of


ordinary people, the majority of people in the movement are ordinary


people with heart felt concerns and they have been branded racists for


four-and-a-half years, everyone has called me a racist. You did say


there should be no more Mosques built in Britain. I said there


should be no more Mosques unless they are regulated like schools are


with Ofsted. We need British born Muslims in control of the Mosques.


What is coming out of this, everyone saying the EDL is being taken over


by Nazis. The first demonstration I didn't go to was Manchester, they


were welcomed back. There was splinter groups gave speeches, so


for me, this is all about being a public face, we have done this for


four years, raised the profile, it has been successful in bringing


things to the forefront. Have you changed your views? I want people to


listen to my views. What people portray my views is not what they


are. I don't hate Muslims. Why do you want to stop Mosques being


built. Unless they are moderated and regulated. Because I believe there


is a problem. We see problems in documentaries and they say that's


not Islam and it is not representative, but there is a


problem. For me, this leaving is about, we are four years in, I see


it as a step forward, I see it as an nechltable progression into what we


were doing and I don't see beneficial doing what we were doing.


Do you think this country is in danger? I have sat in there and


watched the news and we have 2,000 British people fight fighting


al-Sheebab. The biggest threat to this country is Islamist terrorist


extremism. I despies far-right extremism. I have battled through


this organisation to be true and steer it in what me and my cousin


have built it on. You haven't changed your views? No, basically


no-one is listening to what I have said for four-and-a-half years. Our


message has been lost in translation because of the actions of minority.


This is more serious than marching through streets. I have three


beautiful children and I want them to grow up in a safe Britain and the


same, when I met these lads with quill yam, to anyone saying I have


bottled out, when I met this week with a Pakistani girl who is working


within that organisation and they have set up offices in Pakistan


where the Taliban are operating and they are there on the ground


tackling extremism, that is not bottling out. That is putting your


life on the front line to tackle bottling out. That is putting your


extremism. That is what I want to do. I don't want to let these


supporters down, who have meant everything to me and got three


through four years, because a voice has been built for them and that is


what this has become, a voice for working class people. I want to use


the voice in a positive way. Not in a positive way where it is


discriminating against Muslims. I will take this opportunity to say to


Muslim, if anyone has felt fear and intimidation, I apologise for that.


I ask them to listen, that British women and non-Muslim women are


feeling scared. It is about showing people the right way. When I am


asking my supporters, I see this as the right step forward. I see


working with quill yam, working with Muslim reformists and


anti-extremists, I see it as the way to go. I ask them to put faith in


me. This has been the biggest decision of my life. This is the


hardest thing I have had to do. All the things I have wanted to do, this


has been the hardest thing. Are you more optimistic now? I am more


optimistic after meet meeting with quill yam. It is a massive blow to


extremism. I want to be true to my representation. Half my best


friends- I am not willing for demonstrations to go on that I can't


attend and me be the public face. Not so long ago you were saying EDL


till I die. People are saying I have surrendered. I see this as taking


two steps forward. I see this as a massive, massive move forward and a


massive blow to the Islamist ideology in this country. To


overcome the threat, we have to work with must lemmings. Is Do you think


there are too many Muslims in this country? We have to protect our


culture. We have to protect immigration. I want an end to


immigration, Islamic imgroupings, until the problem is solved. You can


carry on building Mosques when they are moderated and regulated. But


there has to be movement on either side. I want what is best for this


country. You can be British and side. I want what is best for this


black and you can be a Muslim British? You can be English and be a


Muslim. The man from Essex, I am from Luton tourngs there is no


difference between us. If Pakistani heritage Muslims, wearing England


tops and proud to embrace the Union Jack, every one of those supporters


would be happy much the way these supporters are judged is so unfair.


I have spent time with them. They are all decent people. There is an


element that I have battled and for me it is about moving forward what I


think is right, at the same time, it is about I am the public face. What


people forget, when they left their top-up and there is a picture of a


mosque with boom on it, that is my face that is being represented with


that. Such strong issues, I am spending all my time fight against


elements in the EDL. Thank you. Coming up Heinz Wolff is figuring


out how to build a Hadron Collider with a golf ball, a torch, and a


pebble. America is still celebrating the


capture at the weekend of Anas al-Libby, the Libyan seized by US


forces on suspicious of terrorist outrages. His presence in the


country is a further sign that more than two years since western


intervention in Libya, it is a far from security and settled state.


Britain played a prominent part in the intervention. Now, our reporter


has returned to eastern Libya where the revolt began and where it was


declared victorious. They fought Guadalajara, now they


are ready to fight the revolutionary government they replaced him with


T Two years ago Britain and other


western powers helped Libyan militias like this win freedom from


tyranny now Britain is being asked to help free the countries from the


militias themselves as they become the new tyrants. The oil that should


fle from this term nail is Libya's main source of wealth. But the


militia have shut the industry down. That is losing the country $130


million a day. Former rebel commanders refuse to return to


civilian life. We were hoping to lay down our weapons and go home but we


realise if we do that now, revolutionaries like us will be


killed on our doorsteps. The revolution has been stolen from us.


Ex Exports won't restart until the east of the country, which has most


of the oil, is allowed to keep most of the revenue for itself. Their


leader, a prisoner under Gaddafi, is holding the country to ransome. Our


numbers are more than 20,000 and growing. People joining from various


ex-army units, police and border patrols. All we want is for everyone


to have their fair share. If the government thinks of attack


attacking us it will lead to a real civil war but we know they don't


have the power to do that. Along the road from the term nail, the remains


of the battle that saved eastern Libya for the rebels two years ago.


Gaddafi's forces were smashed first by French and then by British


missiles as the dictator attempted a counter offensive. In total Britain


spent £212 million on its air campaign in Libya.


Your city was an inspiration to the world as you threw off a dictator


and chose freedom. Now Ben GAZ-24y so dangerous no western official


will set foot here. Two years on from David Cameron's appearance


here, it's clear that gnat toe missiles didn't only depose a


dictator, they helped destroy a state. Before Libyans were terrified


of the police. Now they are terrified by the lack of them.


Gaddafi warned that he would be replaced by tribalism, Islamic


extremism and anarchy. And in large measure he's been proved right. This


police station is one of several here that had been bombed


repeatedly. The attackers unknown. There are almost daily assassination


attempts on military officers or public figures. Flying openly over


parts of the city, the black flag of Jihad. What we have here, we have a


geographical region that is void of the presence of a state. This region


is under the control of extremist radical movements that are either


sympathetic or in full co-operation with Al-Qaeda. This suspected


Al-Qaeda leader is now being intergrated on an American warship


on the med after being snatched by US forces at the weekend from his


on the med after being snatched by car in Tripoli where he was living


legally. These are the kind of recyclable weapons they could get


their hands on. This pile of order Nantes recovered from bunkers has


been secured by a British demining charity but many similar sites, with


serviceable weapons have been taken over by militias, or left open to


looters. We have this particular ammunition storage area, we have


removed up wards of 35 tonnes of explosive content which equates to


probably 70,000 plus individual items of ordnance. If you take this


as a snapshot and times that by 400, that gives you a bit of an estimate


of how big the problem here really is. Libya is now thought to have the


world's largest unsecured arms scabbing pile. Millions of tonnes of


weapons are unaccounted for, including up to 8,000 manpowered


portable missile systems. Even Libya's Prime Minister


acknowledges the scale of the threat. Weapons are being smuggled


from and into Libya by groups which are trying to murder people and


spread terror. The movement of these weapons is also putting our


neighbouring countries at risk. We weapons is also putting our


need international co-operation to stop it. Not all militia are


extremists. These aren't. But there will be no order until they are all


extremists. These aren't. But there forged into a national army. That's


where Libya most needs foreign help. Hundreds of fighters will be sent


for training to Britain and other countries later this year. But it


will be a slow process, partly because militias have supporters


will be a slow process, partly within the government. They are paid


huge sums by the state, even when they oppose it. The extremist


militias understood from the very beginning of the revolution that


their main foe in the future would be a military institution. Thus they


chose to control the Ministry of Defence and the Prime Ministerry and


parliament in order to prevent the creation of a proper army that would


serve the people and the interests of the people. In this home, a


former rebel commander is keeping his weapons safe. His Islamist


militia was driven off the streets by popular protest but he thinks


they will be back. You keep these here all the time? Yes. Sometimes


you may get the impression that people hate the brigades but that's


not completely true. Now a year on there are people who are demanding


our return. The Prime Minister admits his power is very limited. We


are in a state of revolution, so we have no choice. The Libyan state has


no control over the repercussions of the revolution because the state is


weak. Now with no end in sight to the oil blockade, the state is


getting weaker by the day. America's raid on Tripoli may reflect a new


estimation in Washington that the government can't turn the corner,


the failing state could become a failed one. Look at Libya, President


Assad said recently, for a lesson in the results of outside intervention


in a civil war. He would say that of course, but now there may be former


interventionists who would agree. Oliver Miles is the former British


ambassador to Libya and he is here with Rory Stewart. Taking up the


point there, when you look at the state that cannot secure itself,


cannot even protect its own main source of income it is close to a


failed state. I think that is exaggerated. I think it is a long


way from being a failed state. I think that there are real problems,


it is very fragile but considering they had a real revolution only two


years ago and they replace replaced a vile dictatorship, which was


unique in the way it had absolutely flattened all institutions in Libya,


destroyed every institution, including the mosque, including the


army, including the police, there was nothing, so they are build from


nothing, it is a very difficult task. Do you reckon it is a failed


state for close to it? It is close to it. It is a very, very awful


situation. It is not yet a full out civil war. It may be and it is a


terrible thing to say, but it may be better than living under Gaddafi but


it is a terrible situation. It does prove that Gaddafi was possibly


right in saying that a country like that required a very, very strong


tire an cal government. This is what all these people say, it is what


Assad said, what Saddam said, it is the obvious thing to say in the


Middle East. They are right. Certainly when the strong man goes


you have a lot of trouble. The question is what do you do, do you


put up with someone like Assad, because what he is saying at the


moment is I am the man who keeps order. He is maintaining a civil


war. Would you say the same of Mussolini, he ran the place before


Gaddafi, are you saying they need a Mussolini, surely not. When you look


at western interveinings, what Karzai said about Afghanistan, they


are hardly happy Presidents? No they are not, I would was very doubtful


about intervention in Libya, I was against t but I was wrong. Having


been to Libya since the revolution and seen what a happy country it is


compared to the way it was before, I think what we did was right. On that


one, I was struck on the two trips I went to Libya, I went pessimistic, I


turned up the day after Gaddafi had fallen, you can see the groups


deafing, but it was much better -- developing: It is a terrible thing


to say, but it is better than it could have been. It isn't yet an all


out civil war. It still has a hope. It is a very, very worrying


situation, when you have all these vast numbers of untracked weapons.


Sure, that is a very serious problem. It is a problem that may


yet cause very serious trouble not only in Libya but elsewhere. But


that is a different issue from whether it is a failed state. We


need to be realistic about intervention and understand that


with these sorts of interventions we may have to accept this is a


possibility. When we do these things over the next 20 years, people need


to realise there are no good choices. You don't think better not


to do them? Either better not to do them is one view. But what I don't


think is the idea we should be dragged into nation building. This


failed state, Gaddafi didn't have a state himself, he ran is in a


bizarre fashion. There wasn't much of a state to take over. Correct. In


ewapiti for example, when push came to shove they turned to the army.


There is no army to turn to in libbia, there's nothing. The


alternative will look like Algeria, military oppression against


Islamists. That looks very nasty too. Algeria was a civil war in


which hundreds of thousands of people were killed, it went on for


20 years, it is a similar country to labouria. What we are praying for


Libya that it is a leadership that can emerge will avoid that. There's


been this interference with the oil Simplirix which was essentially


because the people who were guarding the oil facilities were not being


paid and they took the law into their own hands, which was a


suicidal thing to do for the country, not for them individually.


But that problem has been partly solved. Similar thing happened with


the water. That has been solved. There are moves in the right


direction. The militias which were controlling the airport and frontier


posts a year ago are no longer doing so. It's now being done centrally.


You have to keep these things in perspective. One of the things the


report mentioned was that now in eastern Libya there is an


assassination attempt almost every day. In Iraq, 1,000 people were


murdered last month and 1,000 people the month before that. Egypt, Syria,


Iraq, Algeria, this is the context in which we need to see what is


happening in Libya. It is a tragic situation but I still feel Gaddafi


had to go. Thank you very much. A woman's right to shoes was the way


one character put it in Sex And The City. There is no question that


shoes in one form or another, high heels or loafers, or cowboy boots


are the fashion obsession of the 21st century. There are still people


living in places like carnes house who remain proud of the pair which


living in places like carnes house has served them for 40 years.


Tamara Mellon, I want to start with Jimmy Choo, you built a spectacular


brand, but your whole business model sounds like it was incredibly


painful. It was very difficult because we had private equity come


into the business and very often their interests are not aligned with


yours. I believe that private equity has turned into something that was


never meant to be. It's become a way for guys to get fees by flipping


companies. So they want to come in and out of a company within two to


three years and for a management team to go through a sale process


every two, three years is just not sustainable. I geese people will be


listening to this and say private equity made you incredibly rich. I


would say I made them incredibly rich. They are not experts in the


luxury business, none of them had been in it before. I think there is


a big misconception about them funding the business. They don't


fund the business. They take debt to buy shares and the company pays the


interest on their debt. In fact it is a burden on the business rather


than a help. Do you think there were gender


assumptions or do you think you were difficult to work with? That is such


an easy comment to make about a woman in business. I have had other


comments like she's just wants to be a celebrity. I don't think we in


this country should be discouraging women entrepreneurs in that way.


this country should be discouraging That is a very sexist slander. It's


not a slander, I am asking you the question, what was it that you think


came from them? I think because they have a fear of women in business and


I think they believe that the only way to work with women is to bully


and control, rather than understand this person's an asset and if we


collaborate we are going to get so much more out of this.


What do you think accounted for the success of Jimmy Choo, was it the


tailormanship, was it the design or was it the branding, the marketing?


It was a combination of everything. I couldn't have done it if I didn't


have the product. Everything always has to come back to the product. The


most important thing for a luxury brand is quality and innovation.


Innovation is a curious word because you found Jimmy Choo by all accounts


who, you said never designed a single shoe. The plan was for Jimmy


to design the collection and I would run the operations of the business.


But it became very clear that Jimmy's technical skill was in, he


was connectically skilled in making a shoe but didn't have the creative


vision to design a collection. Wait! I lost my Khoo. How key do you think


Sex And The City was to that whole brand understanding for Jimmy Choo?


Sex And The City was to that whole That was a big milestone for us. It


was huge, because it turns you into a household name overnight. Being in


a glossy magazine is amazing and it value dates you, but that is the


type of thing that you are just a household name and not all those


people will buy your core product but it leads you into being able to


do fragrance and sunglasses and the aspirational product that people can


buy into. And that programme, your brand, sold the heel as a power tool


for women. It was a you can do anything. The truth is, the heel is


crippling, slow you down, make you precarious, don't give you power,


they give you bunions. I could argue it the other way. I know that I feel


more empowered when I am taller, I can look a man in the eye, and I


like the way it holds my posture. And shoes, high heels should not be


painful. Come on, tell me you have never had an uncomfortable pair? I


have, but most shoe designers are men. This time round I have been


back to the last factory in Italy and worked with the last maker to


back to the last factory in Italy make sure my heels are comfortable,


I don't want to be in pain. The Culture Secretary says she's hoping


to say on Friday what the Government wants to do about regulating the


press. Reported last night the sub-committee of the Privy Council


considering the newspapers own ideas on the subject had Chucked them out


considering the newspapers own ideas much the Government is now ducking


and driving to try to find some form of words which might satisfy


everyone not least Labour and the Liberal Democrats, who thought there


was an agreed cross-party position on the issue. Here is an update on


where we are now. In July 2011 the Leveson Inquiry was


set up into phone hacking and so began a 30-month fight between the


press and politicians. In November 2012 its report said hacking had


wreaked havoc with lives of innocent people. By March 2013 all political


parties supported a royal charter people. By March 2013 all political


for press regulation. By April this would be rejected by all but two of


Britain's 11 national newspapers. The other nine put forward their own


royal charter and since early summer, a small group of cabinet


ministers has been considering it. They wrapped up on Monday. Yesterday


Newsnight revealed that the Cabinet ministers charged with reviewing the


press's charter had rejected it and today following our revelations, the


Culture Secretary came to the House of Commons to make an unscheduled


statement. Yes, the Government would be rejecting the press's charter,


but they had some compromises within it. The committee of the Privy


Council is unable to recommend the press proposal for a royal charter


be granted. Whilst there are areas where it is acceptable it is unable


to comply with some important Leveson principles, having


considered the press charter the committee has identified two


substantive areas, access to arbitration and the editor's code.


Where we could improve what's in the 18th March draft. Newsnight


understands that Tory cabinet ministers on the Privy Council more


mindful of newspapers a concerns pushed for two of their own


overtures to the press, but another significant element revealed today


was that the Tories accepted the eventual charter needs to be agreed


by all three parties and so Labour has to approve everything in order


for the eventual proposal to remain a cross-party one. We believe the


charter should have been submitted for consideration at the Privy


charter should have been submitted Council meeting tomorrow but it will


not be going to that meeting because the Prime Minister has chosen to


delay its submission to the end of this month. We regret this because


there has been nearly a year since Leveson reported and six months


since the House agreed the draft charter. Mr Speaker, there has


already been too much delay. All involved know the victims of phone


hacking are getting fed up with waiting, so the Labour Party now has


to make decisions at a breakneck speed. Newsnight understands they


feel they can wear one Tory compromise but are more concerned by


a second one, over the editors code. All political parties must have


agreed a final draft text by this Friday. If this new charter can't be


agreed by then, then on October 30th the original cross-party charter so


loathed by the press will be rubber-stamped.


With us now is Jacqui Hames, the former police officer who had her


phone hacked and is now a spokesperson for the Hacked Off


campaign, and Roger altogetheron Executive Editor of the Times but is


here as a hummable human being. All over for you guys, isn't it?


Well, I wouldn't talk about one of the most important struggles for a


key aspect of our democracy, freedom of the press as if it is Arsenal


versus Norwich, and I think there is a very, very long way to go. The


industry has made extraordinary concessions. Three days. Three days


before the Privy Council decides whether to accept T there will be a


lot of bargaining over the next few days. I think it won't work. Then we


have to move on to the next step. The idea what the press which is


given so much away, a million pound fines, massive investigatory powers,


is going to accept something that nobody wants. It can't have a


voluntary system of self-regulation. What do you mean nobody wants, you


want it? I think so, the majority of the readers of the Times want T


there was a U Gough poll commissioned by yourselves and your


readers want you to accept the independent regulation that we are


supporting. We completely accept the need to change the nature of


regulation. We have put in place a hole heap of things. We don't want a


stat tribody because that is the end of 300 years of the free press. You


have to accept that. I Don't accept it whatsoever. By proposing your own


own version of the royal charter aren't you accepting that is the


own version of the royal charter mechanism to do this. There are two


choices, one which is compliant with the representations of a judge who


sat down and had a very intensive inquiry and his recommendations are


accepted not only by parliament, all three parties for the first time in


goodness knows how many years have agreed but also by the majority of


the public. Your readership, they want you to be regulated


independently. You know the public's on her side. I question that.


Really? The we have one of the great raucous Viteal presses in the Welsh


world. Which goes around hacking people's phones. Those were shocking


criminal offences and a heap of trials are about to take place. Do


we need more laws. There are laws engulfing the press. You don't want


to have parliament involved. You must admit that. Hacked off doesn't


like the press. What you have to look at is the press charter had


more opportunities within it for politicians to be involved than the


one that Lord Justice Leveson is compliant. You have to actually take


a bit of a calmer view. I know it is passionate, we all feel passionate


about free speech. I would not be sitting here if I thought for one


moment that was in danger. If this particular proposal kills off some


newspapers as the newspaper industry say, it may well local newspapers,


then would that be a good outcome? , don't think that is the case,


clearly there is a revolution going on with technology and news


gathering and output in the way that it is consumed by the public. I


think that is every industry is going through that because of the


world, the electronic world we live in. That is nothing to do with the


fact that the public are sick of being bullied and having this


culture of newspapers taking advantage of their power. You can't


have a voluntary system where the volunteers don't want to volunteer.


I think what will happen is judicial review possibility. I think that you


could go to Europe because we think it is an unjust law and see what


Europe has to say. The idea papers are going to roll over and do


something they don't believe in is unlikely. I would hope we don't. I


would rather do anything than submit to something that is such a brazen


blockage on a great, great institution in Britain. The sad


thing is you need to read the recommendations of Leveson and you


will realise it enshrines free speech. He has had them. One thing


you can guarantee he has read them. The recognition body, whether that


is parliamentary or whether it is set up in the way we would... There


are plenty of safeguards to ensure you would need three-quarters of the


Houses of Parliament to agree to start change changing it. Certainly


that there are more safeguards... Thank you very much. Two October


general areas achieved a triumph today when they were awarded the


Nobel Prize for physics. One was a Belgian, the other is Peter Higgs of


Edinburgh University, the man after the Higgs boson was named.


Dr Heinz Wolff is going to tell us about it, but first here is the man


himself explaining what a Higgs boson is.


The Higgs boson is associated with this field, it is the relation


between waves and particles, electro electromagnetive waves, waves in


this quantity which oz lates up and down that trough. That probably


tells you nothing. So, to assist us is another October general area, Dr


Heinz Wolff, how old are you? 85. You are in sprightly form. Explain


to us what is the Higgs boson. Let me explain something else, I have a


pebble here, and it has a property, a mass, if I throw it at you, you


would get hurt, you get hurt because the speed of the particle and the


mass which conveys the energy. Physicists have tried to get a


unified theory of how mass actually works. The theory was, if there are


three particles which were essentially massless. There was a


gap, like having built a Lego model and there is a hole in it and you


have to find a piece to fill the hole. Peter Higgs, 40 years ago,


operating at a mental level of mathematics and theoretical physics,


said there must be a particle which fits the hole, which conveys a


property of mass to all other particles. People People built huge


pieces of machinery. The Higgs boson particles. People People built huge


was produced. He had thought of it, but it was produced. What is the


golf ball and torch got to do with it? I was just, the torch I brought


because to make particles isn't very difficult, there are particles


coming out of the front of here now. They are don't have mass because


they have frequency. I can't make the other particles. What he had


worked out in his mind turned out 20 decades later to be true. That is a


very considerable achievement. And it's taken billions of pounds and


very considerable achievement. And hundreds of engineers and hundreds


of scientists to construct a machine which was capable of producing the


huge energies which are required to liberate the Higgs boson. There may


be more than one, but people now believe that the theory is very


nearly complete and the physicist can explain by enlarge what matters


are made of and why it has mass. If you think about the Higgs boson, it


isn't the particles, they aren't spheres, but they have a force field


around them. Any other particle which is in that field requires


mass. Therefore can convey energy. That is what it is. Part of the


problem was the difficulty of making it, because it could only be made by


getting two protons, which are particles that do have mass, to


collide in a very large piece of machinery at the speed of light, and


the fragments that come out of this, one of them turned out to be the


Higgs boson. Brilliant, I am almost there, thank you very much.


Tomorrow morning's front pages, almost all of them go with the


accusation that The Guardian has haven'ted a gift to terrorist with


its revelations about surveillance mechanisms. That is about it for


tonight. We will be back tomorrow. Before we go, they are remaking the


famous horror movie Carrie, about a girl who uses her telly Kennetic


powers to exact revenge on her tormentors. A new film-maker has


modified a New York coffee shop and hired actors and cameras among the


modified a New York coffee shop and real customers. This is what


happened. Good night.


Oh my God. You just ruined all of my stuff. It's nap kins, clean it up.


There is coffee inside my computer. Just get away from me.


Download Subtitles