Thriller particles noticed? Discovery would require physics so bizarre that no one even thought it [Report]



There was a lot of excitement when the Higgs boson was first spotted in 2012 – a discovery that sacked the Nobel Prize in physics in 2013. The particles completed a so-called standard model, our current best theory of understanding the nature at the particle level.


Now scientists at the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) in Cernu think they can see another particle found as a peak in a certain amount of energy in the data, although the findings still need to be confirmed. Again, there is plenty of excitement between particle physics, but this time mixed with anxiety. Unlike the Higgs particle that confirmed our understanding of physical reality, this new particle seems to be threatening.

The new result – consisting of a mysterious data impact of 28 GeV (energy unit) – was published as a preprint on ArXiv. It's not yet a peer-reviewed magazine – but that's not a big deal. Collaboration with the LHC has a very tight internal review, and we can be convinced that the authors correctly earned these amounts when they reported "4.2 standard deviations". This means that the probability of getting to the top of this big random – generated by random noise in data rather than real particle – is only 0.0013%. That's tiny – 13 out of a million. It seems to be a real event rather than a random noise – but no one is lighting the champagne yet.

What they say

Many LHC experiments, which break the proton beams together, find evidence of new and exotic particles in search of unusual formation of known particles, such as photons (light particles) or electrons. This is because heavy and "invisible" particles, such as the Higgs, are often unstable and tend to disintegrate (break) into lighter particles that are more readily detected. These particles can therefore be searched in experimental data to see if they result from heavier particle decomposition. LHC has found many new particles with such techniques and all are equipped with a standard model.

The new finding comes from an experiment involving a CMS detector that has seen a number of mion pairs – well-known and easily identified particles that are similar to electrons but heavier. She analyzed their energies and directions and asked: If this pair originated from the decomposition of a single parent particle, what would that parent's meat be like?

In most cases, pairs of muons come from a variety of sources – they come from two different events rather than from the breakdown of one particle. If you try to calculate the parent weight in such cases, it would spread over a wide range of energies rather than creating a narrow maximum, namely 28GeV (or some other energy) in the data. But in this case it definitely seems to be the summit. Maybe. You can look at this character and you can judge it yourself.

Is it a real peak or is it just a statistical fluctuation due to random scattering around the background (intermittent curve)? If it is real, it means that some of these pairs of muons actually came from a large part of the mother's particle that disintegrated with the release of muons – and no such 28 GeV particle has ever been seen before.

Everything looks somewhat interesting, but history teaches us carefully. The effects of this significant condition occurred in the past, but disappeared when further data were obtained. Anomalies The Digamma (750) is a recent example of a long series of false alarms – false "discoveries" due to equipment problems, too enthusiastic analysis or just bad luck.

This is partly due to what is called the "look elsewhere" effect: although the probability of accidental noise that produces the peak if you look specifically at the value of 28 GeV may be 13 per million, such noise could provide a peak somewhere else in the plot , possibly at 29GeV or 16GeV. The probability of these due to chance is also small when considered, but the sum of these tiny probabilities is not so small (though still small). This means that it is not possible for the top to be created by accidental noise.

And there are some mysterious aspects. For example, the impact occurred in one run of the LHC, but not in another when the energy doubled. One would expect that new phenomena could increase if the energy was higher. Maybe there are reasons, but it is unpleasant at this point.

New physical reality?

This theory is even more incompatible. Just as experimental particle physicists spend their time looking for new particles, the theoreticians spend their time thinking about new parts that would make sense: particles that fill the missing parts of the standard model or explain dark matter (type of invisible matter), or both. But no one has suggested anything like that.

Theoreticians, for example, suggest that we find a lighter version of the Higgs particle. But none of what would have happened to the muon. They also talk about a light boson Z or a heavy photon, but they will interact with electrons. That means we should probably find them already because the electrons are easy to detect. Potential new particles do not match the properties of any of the proposed ones.

If this particle actually exists, it's not just outside the standard model but outside it in a way that no one expected. Just as Newtonian gravity receded Einstein's general relativity, the standard model would be replaced. But substitution will not be one of the most popular candidates that have already been proposed to expand the standard model: including supersymmetry, additional dimensions, and grand unification theories. These all suggest new particles, but no one with the features we just saw. It must be something so strange that it has not been suggested yet.

Fortunately, the second large LHC experiment, ATLAS, has similar data to its experiments. The team is still analyzing and reporting on time. Cynical experience says it will announce a zero signal, and this result joins the gallery of statistical fluctuations. But maybe – just maybe – they will see something. And then life for experimentalists and theorists will be very busy and very interesting.

tweet

There was a lot of excitement when the Higgs boson was first spotted in 2012 – a discovery that sacked the Nobel Prize in physics in 2013. The particles completed a so-called standard model, our current best theory of understanding the nature at the particle level.

Now scientists at the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) in Cernu think they can see another particle found as a peak in a certain amount of energy in the data, although the findings still need to be confirmed. Again, there is plenty of excitement between particle physics, but this time mixed with anxiety. Unlike the Higgs particle that confirmed our understanding of physical reality, this new particle seems to be threatening.

The new result – consisting of a mysterious data impact of 28 GeV (energy unit) – was published as a preprint on ArXiv. It's not yet a peer-reviewed magazine – but that's not a big deal. Collaboration with the LHC has a very tight internal review, and we can be convinced that the authors correctly earned these amounts when they reported "4.2 standard deviations". This means that the probability of getting to the top of this big random – generated by random noise in data rather than real particle – is only 0.0013%. That's tiny – 13 out of a million. It seems to be a real event rather than a random noise – but no one is lighting the champagne yet.

What they say

Many LHC experiments, which break the proton beams together, find evidence of new and exotic particles in search of unusual formation of known particles, such as photons (light particles) or electrons. This is because heavy and "invisible" particles, such as the Higgs, are often unstable and tend to disintegrate (break) into lighter particles that are more readily detected. These particles can therefore be searched in experimental data to see if they result from heavier particle decomposition. LHC has found many new particles with such techniques and all are equipped with a standard model.

The new finding comes from an experiment involving a CMS detector that has seen a number of mion pairs – well-known and easily identified particles that are similar to electrons but heavier. She analyzed their energies and directions and asked: If this pair originated from the decomposition of a single parent particle, what would that parent's meat be like?

In most cases, pairs of muons come from a variety of sources – they come from two different events rather than from the breakdown of one particle. If you try to calculate the parent weight in such cases, it would spread over a wide range of energies rather than creating a narrow maximum, namely 28GeV (or some other energy) in the data. But in this case it definitely seems to be the summit. Maybe. You can look at this character and you can judge it yourself.

Is it a real peak or is it just a statistical fluctuation due to random scattering around the background (intermittent curve)? If it is real, it means that some of these pairs of muons actually came from a large part of the mother's particle that disintegrated with the release of muons – and no such 28 GeV particle has ever been seen before.

Everything looks somewhat interesting, but history teaches us carefully. The effects of this significant condition occurred in the past, but disappeared when further data were obtained. Anomalies The Digamma (750) is a recent example of a long series of false alarms – false "discoveries" due to equipment problems, too enthusiastic analysis or just bad luck.

This is partly due to what is called the "look elsewhere" effect: although the probability of accidental noise that produces the peak if you look specifically at the value of 28 GeV may be 13 per million, such noise could provide a peak somewhere else in the plot , possibly at 29GeV or 16GeV. The probability of these due to chance is also small when considered, but the sum of these tiny probabilities is not so small (though still small). This means that it is not possible for the top to be created by accidental noise.

And there are some mysterious aspects. For example, the impact occurred in one run of the LHC, but not in another when the energy doubled. One would expect that new phenomena could increase if the energy was higher. Maybe there are reasons, but it is unpleasant at this point.

New physical reality?

This theory is even more incompatible. Just as experimental particle physicists spend their time looking for new particles, the theoreticians spend their time thinking about new parts that would make sense: particles that fill the missing parts of the standard model or explain dark matter (type of invisible matter), or both. But no one has suggested anything like that.

Theoreticians, for example, suggest that we find a lighter version of the Higgs particle. But none of what would have happened to the muon. They also talk about a light boson Z or a heavy photon, but they will interact with electrons. That means we should probably find them already because the electrons are easy to detect. Potential new particles do not match the properties of any of the proposed ones.

If this particle actually exists, it's not just outside the standard model but outside it in a way that no one expected. Just as Newtonian gravity receded Einstein's general relativity, the standard model would be replaced. But substitution will not be one of the most popular candidates that have already been proposed to expand the standard model: including supersymmetry, additional dimensions, and grand unification theories. These all suggest new particles, but no one with the features we just saw. It must be something so strange that it has not been suggested yet.

Fortunately, the second large LHC experiment, ATLAS, has similar data to its experiments. The team is still analyzing and reporting on time. Cynical experience says it will announce a zero signal, and this result joins the gallery of statistical fluctuations. But maybe – just maybe – they will see something. And then life for experimentalists and theorists will be very busy and very interesting.


Source link