Jump to content

Possibly something new at the LHC


Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, WalterP said:

 

This has interest of course, but I'm no fonder of the standard model of mainstream particle physics than I am of mainstream cosmology. For theory to call such a particle a leptoquark that lasts just  a quintillioth of a second, a thousand-billion-billions of a second, stretches the imagination IMO. Yes, they say it would violate the standard model of particle physics, but what value is any theory if much of it is wrong? They gave the Nobel Prize for the Higgs boson whose entire life lasted just 15.6 thousand-billion-billions (1.56x10^-22) of a second, because such a permanent particle was predicted by theory -- but the one they found lasted only quintilionths of a second -- maybe it helped justify the costs of the Large Hadron Collider? But I'm not impressed.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physics_beyond_the_Standard_Model

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Something also new at the Firmi National Accelerator lab, "A tiny, wobbling muon just shook particle physics to its core"

 

"Evidence taken from the Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory near Chicago appears to point to a miniscule subatomic particle known as the muon wobbling far more than theory predicts it should. The best explanation, according to physicists, is that the muon is being pushed about by types of matter and energy completely unknown to physics.

If the results are true, the discovery represents a breakthrough in particle physics of a kind that hasn't been seen for 50 years, when the dominant theory to explain subatomic particles was first developed. The tiny wobble of a muon — called the magnetic moment — could shake the very foundations of science."

 

Pretty strong wordings. :)  Somebody seems happy and amazed 🥳

 

https://www.livescience.com/muon-wobble-could-break-physics.html?utm_source=Selligent&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=LVS_newsletter&utm_content=LVS_newsletter+&utm_term=2875217

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...
On 4/7/2021 at 10:26 PM, pantheory said:

When journalists write the headlines they are always fantastic.  However another scientist actually predicted this wobble.  From the story:

 

However, a rival calculation made by a separate group and published Wednesday (April 7) in the journal Nature could rob the wobble of its significance. According to this team's calculations, which give a much larger value to the most uncertain term in the equation that predicts the muon's rocking motion, the experimental results are totally in line with predictions. Twenty years of particle chasing could have all been for nothing. 

"If our calculations are correct and the new measurements do not change the story, it appears that we don't need any new physics to explain the muon's magnetic moment — it follows the rules of the Standard Model," Zoltan Fodor, a professor of physics at Penn State and a leader of the research team that published the Nature paper, said in a statement.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Clizby_Wampuscat said:

When journalists write the headlines they are always fantastic.  However another scientist actually predicted this wobble.  From the story:

 

However, a rival calculation made by a separate group and published Wednesday (April 7) in the journal Nature could rob the wobble of its significance. According to this team's calculations, which give a much larger value to the most uncertain term in the equation that predicts the muon's rocking motion, the experimental results are totally in line with predictions. Twenty years of particle chasing could have all been for nothing. 

"If our calculations are correct and the new measurements do not change the story, it appears that we don't need any new physics to explain the muon's magnetic moment — it follows the rules of the Standard Model," Zoltan Fodor, a professor of physics at Penn State and a leader of the research team that published the Nature paper, said in a statement.

 

I'm not very fond of the standard model of particle physics so either way it went, did not mean very much to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderator
On 8/12/2021 at 7:14 PM, pantheory said:

 

I'm not very fond of the standard model of particle physics so either way it went, did not mean very much to me.

 

Yes, but the point being that the standard model can explain it according to the article. To be fair, this doesn't look like a win for the anti-standard model camp. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Joshpantera said:

 

Yes, but the point being that the standard model can explain it according to the article. To be fair, this doesn't look like a win for the anti-standard model camp. 

 

No, you're right concerning this particular observation. But there are almost countless problems with the model IMO. This observation and possible problem was very small in comparison to much bigger problems with the standard model IMO which I won't go into here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
On 3/23/2021 at 9:27 PM, pantheory said:

 

...For theory to call such a particle a leptoquark that lasts just  a quintillioth of a second, a thousand-billion-billions of a second, stretches the imagination IMO. Yes, they say it would violate the standard model of particle physics, but what value is any theory if much of it is wrong? They gave the Nobel Prize for the Higgs boson whose entire life lasted just 15.6 thousand-billion-billions (1.56x10^-22) of a second...

 

But where will you spend eternity?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Super Moderator
17 minutes ago, alreadyGone said:

 

But where will you spend eternity?

 

Right now I'm spending it with my computer looking at this silly thread.😛

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, alreadyGone said:

 

But where will you spend eternity?

 

 

Hopefully in my own Harem with 100 virgins. In my harem  the girls do not have to be 9 years old like Mohammad's second wife who he said he never had relations with until she went into puberty. Instead all my girls can be 16 years and older as long as long as they are pretty, sexy, and virgins. The problem for me to achieve this goal is twofold. First, there aren't very many pretty, sexy girls 16 and older who are still virgins. But my second problem is even bigger; I'm not willing to die in a suicide bombing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.