At least two other particles could be masquerading as the God particle, according to a new analysis of the data from CERN
The news coming out of CERN in recent weeks has been hard to miss. At first, there was a dripfeed of gossip which turned into a firehose of ‘Higgsteria’. Finally, last Wednesday, CERN announced that it had found a new particle that is “consistent with the long-sought Higgs boson”.
Note the phrasing. CERN has been careful not to say that the new particle is the Higgs, only that it could be.
But if not the Higgs, what else might it be?
Today, Ian Low at Argonne National Laboratory in Illinois and a couple of buddies comb through the
data in
to throw some light on this question. Their conclusion is that the data is consistent with at least two other particles that are not the standard Higgs boson. an attempt
Particle identification is not always an easy task. Physicists use a theory known as the Standard Model of particle physics to predict how particles should behave. In 1964, Peter Higgs and others used this theory to predict the existence of the Higgs particle. They said it should be heavy and that it should exist only fleetingly before decaying into various other particles.
In fact, its existence is so fleeting that the only way of spotting the Higgs is to look for the signature of particles that it produces, such as pairs of photons or pairs of other heavy particles called Z bosons.
The trouble is that this signature is not unique, at least not given the amount of data that CERN has so far collected.
Low and co say that given various assumptions about the data, there are several theoretical possibilities. One of these is that the data shows the Higgs boson as predicted by the Standard Model.
But another equally likely option is that the data is evidence of a more exotic theory in which the Higgs boson exists in several different forms. So the new particle might be one of these, examples of these are a generic Higgs doublet or a triplet imposter.
A final option is based on the idea that particles can exist in mixtures. So the new data does not show the Higgs but a mixture of it and some other particle.
Low and co analyse the data and come to the following conclusion. “A generic Higgs doublet and a triplet imposter give equally good fits to the measured event rates.”
In particular, they say that the predicted signatures of the Higgs boson and the triplet imposter are both within one sigma of the measured value. And by one measure, the CERN data even favours the triplet imposter.However, Low and co are quick to add that the Standard Model prediction is a slightly better fit overall.The message here is that the data at this stage is far from conclusive and could support the existence of any of these three particles.So now there is much to do to clarify exactly what it is that CERN has found.
As Low and co point out: “This is only the beginning of a challenging program of “Higgs Identification”.
Let the Higgsteria continue.
Author Profile
- Web and Mobile App Technology for increasing marketing resources and increase productivity. Automation Customisation CRM ERP Solutions and interesting articles are yet other things we provide.
Health2021.09.29Oxytocin Flowing
Passed Away2021.04.18Prince Philips funeral
Passed Away2021.04.09Prince Philip’s duties are finally over
Journal2021.03.11Cloudflare
Regarding the relative excess of diphoton events, it’s probably mixed effect of supersymmetry (up to 15%) and the oscillations into fourth generation of the particles: the superheavy quarks and neutrinos. The pairing of these particles in Higgs field would be the more intensive than at the case of top-quarks – but because these particles are extremely unstable, they will decay directly into gamma ray photons, before they could be detected as such. The SUSY accounts to the mass of Higgs boson in similar way, like the neutrinos (photinos) account to dark matter matter, i.e. with 7 – 15% only.
IMO what we can see at the power spectrum of Higgs boson is the whole line of bumps, the periodicity of which is quite apparent. IMO it’s not experimental noise, but a real artifact, corresponding this graph of CMBR power spectrum at the scale AdS/CFT dual to cosmological scale: the Higgs field is analogy of dark matter foam at the quantum scale. http://www.gb.nrao.edu/~bmason/cmbhighellB.png This explanation would have its testable consequences, because the power spectrum of CMBR folows dodecahedron symmetry of E8 Lie group vector system – so that the Higgs power spectrum should follow it too.
In context of dense aether theory, which models the space-time with water surface it would follow the experience, that the scattering of transverse surface ripples at the distant scales into longitudinal gravitational waves corresponds the scattering of these ripples at the short scale with longitudinal Brownian noise, i.e. with essentially symmetric process.