tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2846514233477399562.post2553461258976096394..comments2024-01-08T09:37:04.406+01:00Comments on RÉSONAANCES: Do-or-die year Jesterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08947218566941608850noreply@blogger.comBlogger24125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2846514233477399562.post-40030571646974270452015-02-10T10:57:27.390+01:002015-02-10T10:57:27.390+01:00(sigh) The comment clearly states I'm using No...(sigh) The comment clearly states I'm using Nostradamus' prophecies. As has been rigorously shown, that is equivalent to integrating over all possible priors, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nostradamus <br /><br />But seriously, of course this is subjective... it's weird that I even have to explain it. Nevertheless, all excitement about the LHC run-2 is due to pushing the energy frontier by a factor of two. That will happen only once, so it's defendable to think that our chances are the best at the beginning of the run. This is what I meant by "it's not entirely a joke"... Jesterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08947218566941608850noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2846514233477399562.post-19797831712112764582015-02-10T06:21:45.953+01:002015-02-10T06:21:45.953+01:00That's not a description of how you made the p...That's not a description of how you made the plot, it's like a caption of what the axes are.<br /><br />You have to have a prior over new physics scenarios to make this plot. What is the prior, that's my question. <br /><br />Once you specify that, then it is a meaningful and easily interpretable plot.Kyle Cranmernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2846514233477399562.post-67826750733391497972015-02-09T21:45:11.133+01:002015-02-09T21:45:11.133+01:00The methodology is explained in detail in comment ...The methodology is explained in detail in comment #4. The physical interpretation is clear too: the 1st peak is a low-hanging fruit, the 2nd acoustic peak is some less trivial physics that requires more data to isolate. After that it's an exponential fall-off, up to a few glitches that may well be monte carlo flukes. Jesterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08947218566941608850noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2846514233477399562.post-65153292538127074062015-02-09T20:21:55.907+01:002015-02-09T20:21:55.907+01:00Can you say a word or two about how the plot is ma...Can you say a word or two about how the plot is made? <br /><br />You clearly need to assume some prior over where new physics might occur. If I put a huge prior at 10 TeV gluinos then it would have one shape, and if I put it a huge prior on 200 GeV electroweakinos it would have another shape etc.<br /><br />There is some structure in it, is that just poor sampling of the posterior? That structure doesn't seem physical or even meta-physical :-)<br />Kyle Cranmerhttp://theoryandpractice.orgnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2846514233477399562.post-84841991833992783952015-02-09T14:29:27.472+01:002015-02-09T14:29:27.472+01:00Adam,
This post is a good example to illustrate ...Adam, <br /><br />This post is a good example to illustrate that most of what's wrong with particle physics is the attitude. And you really should know better.<br /><br />I have no idea why all this doom and gloom, just a couple of years after the discovery of the first ever fundamental scalar field with nonzero vev??<br /><br />Somehow the imagined "golden age" of the 50-ies in particle physics is lamented by people born way,way after discovery of the Standard Model. I could make a 1000 different arguments why particle physics at that time was depressing. There was absolutely no rigorous proof or "no loose" theorems why increasing energy was the right thing then, and it looked like absence of a small parameter will not allow us to calculate anything related to strong force.<br /><br />The fact that there *is* a fundamental scalar is in my mind akin to the existence of the atomic nucleus - something that does not make sense in the SM. HL LHC will give data to measure the heck out of it. This is a *good* thing! <br /><br />Could it be that the young theorists are just too much of a wooses and are intimidated by hard problems? Is it much easier to write parametrized Monte Carlos and teach experimentalists how to do analyses then actually do fundamental theory?<br /><br />So please do not whine that we are in the dead end just because you do not see the way out of it.<br /><br />Cheers<br />Yuri GershteinAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05437509158200566538noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2846514233477399562.post-31571081932795147982015-01-21T19:31:59.954+01:002015-01-21T19:31:59.954+01:00"If, by next Christmas, we don't hear any..."If, by next Christmas, we don't hear any whispers of anomalies in LHC data..." <br /><br />Being nihilistic for no good reason (cue theorists mourning in July'12 when every other science fan was in heavens) is already bad enough for your health and others' but this is your choice :) <br /><br />On the other hand, please think twice about making statements like the one above ^^~ As an LHC deserter I assure you there'll be blood spilt during this summer in a battle to present results on new physics prematurely, unnecessarily relying on too few data against all reason and common sense, and against all worldwide work regulations and international treaties.tulpoeidnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2846514233477399562.post-9602871549682793642015-01-14T13:09:24.203+01:002015-01-14T13:09:24.203+01:00Jester,
Your pessimism may be premature. Take for...Jester,<br /><br />Your pessimism may be premature. Take for example:<br /> <br />http://arxiv.org/pdf/1501.00993.pdf<br /><br />The Higgs sector may be hiding lots of surprises...Ervin Goldfainhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07585008304556273617noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2846514233477399562.post-56282218092280894252015-01-12T18:30:27.332+01:002015-01-12T18:30:27.332+01:00"we know is certainly not the final theory b..."we know is certainly not the final theory because it cannot account for dark matter, matter-antimatter asymmetry, and cosmic inflation"<br /><br />In the case of dark matter and cosmic inflation, the data increasingly point to these being gravitational phenomena that aren't going to be solved by the Standard Model ever.<br /><br />In the case of matter-antimatter asymmetry, the increasingly unavoidable conclusion is that it was present at t=0 and that the "natural" hypothesis of B=0, L=0 at the moment of the Big Bang is wrong, suggesting that t=0 may not have been t=0 after all.<br /><br />There is every reason to believe that all that is left to add to the Standard Model is an explanation of where its constants come from, a solidification of neutrino physics, and adjustment of the beta functions to reflect quantum gravity.<br /><br />I am in the camp predicting no BSM physics at the Standard Model.<br /><br />The most important finding we will see in the second run of the LHC is that it increase the minimum scale at which any modification to the running of the gauge coupling constants can be present, with it, forcing up the scale at which SUSY can be excluded.andrewhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08172964121659914379noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2846514233477399562.post-3133963637702034182015-01-12T15:26:04.261+01:002015-01-12T15:26:04.261+01:00Dear Jester,
there are numerous anomalies, many i...Dear Jester,<br /><br />there are numerous anomalies, many in indirect observables, mainly in flavour (last week a few of us counted more than 10). Various relevant analyses of the 2012 data set are not yet out or just emerging - in flavour, but also in high-pT searches. So with an April 2015 startup, I think you should allow at least till 2016 or 2017 for anything more subtle than a dimuon resonance in the new dataset.<br /><br />Gell-Mann and Levy invented Cabibbo mixing based on a 3-sigma anomaly (in a footnote). It took 10 years to postulate the charm quark as a direct consequence and 14 years till a naturalness argument was used to correctly predict the charm mass (barely anticipating the J/psi discovery). Perhaps simply no-one has puzzled the current anomalies together yet into the correct model. Even if someone did today, it might take a decade until it's verified (not necessarily, though possibly, involving the LHC).<br /><br />The real point with naturalness, I think, is that there ARE known natural theories of the weak scale. Even if they are slightly beyond the LHC reach, they're massively preferred over, say, the SM. Now it seems that the big "good" natural ideas (SUSY, compositeness) seem to have been had already, and this is frustrating for theorists.<br /><br />Sebastiannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2846514233477399562.post-49684782793310221982015-01-12T12:11:39.506+01:002015-01-12T12:11:39.506+01:00I think what Chester means is not that this is the...I think what Chester means is not that this is the end of particle physics as an intellectual endeavor, but the end of the possibility of raising enough money to pursue it on a serious scale. that is a very real perspective - and fear for people who have their life or at least career attached to it.Chrisnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2846514233477399562.post-680708704051252492015-01-11T23:28:46.911+01:002015-01-11T23:28:46.911+01:00Thanks for the 2 Eiffel towers in you logo ;)Thanks for the 2 Eiffel towers in you logo ;)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2846514233477399562.post-8163451728877317332015-01-10T16:31:54.884+01:002015-01-10T16:31:54.884+01:00Talk about the tears of a clown...Talk about the tears of a clown...StevieBnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2846514233477399562.post-43608679103639427512015-01-10T14:54:43.255+01:002015-01-10T14:54:43.255+01:00The laymen confusion that something has to be disc...The laymen confusion that something has to be discovered or particle physics is in a deep merde is simply not true, for many reasons!<br /><br />It would be nice if people could spop propagaing this for the future of the whole field potentially dangerous myth ...Nemohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15937686207028627202noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2846514233477399562.post-24854479985293100492015-01-10T12:45:37.353+01:002015-01-10T12:45:37.353+01:00As far as I know, there is still the possibility t...As far as I know, there is still the possibility that the standard theoretical framework is emergent and results from a kind of more basic physics that is not known or even not detectable in collisions. If so, any other framework that "includes and extends" the standard one will have the same problem. See for instance: <br />DOI: 10.5539/apr.v6n5p1<br />Of course, this paper is not mainstream (serious?) physics, even though the logic seems correct in itself. The precision of the results is still incredible.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2846514233477399562.post-91048820594696013942015-01-10T01:39:22.260+01:002015-01-10T01:39:22.260+01:00Anon, SHiP is a cool experiment (one of several ex...Anon, SHiP is a cool experiment (one of several experiments of this kind planned in near future). However, just like at the LHC, there is no guarantee nor any hint they will find something new. Jesterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08947218566941608850noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2846514233477399562.post-18356728762061062272015-01-09T23:36:31.353+01:002015-01-09T23:36:31.353+01:00If we insist on the assumptions of absolute scale ...If we insist on the assumptions of absolute scale and strict reductionism, and they are only inadequately tested assumptions, we may be dooming ourselves to continued doldrums and evermore bizarre pseudophysics.Robert L. Oldershawhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15396555790655312393noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2846514233477399562.post-53752088980577183002015-01-09T22:17:22.769+01:002015-01-09T22:17:22.769+01:00What do you think of the proposed SHiP beam dump e...What do you think of the proposed SHiP beam dump experiment at CERN to serach for the Hidden Sector (http://ship.web.cern.ch/ship/)? Maybe we shall not focus only on high energy but consider also high intensities...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2846514233477399562.post-12559186294088890382015-01-09T22:13:52.290+01:002015-01-09T22:13:52.290+01:00Onion algebra is a parody of complex algebra.Onion algebra is a parody of complex algebra.Alex Smallhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01570010094558735159noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2846514233477399562.post-90044250604432757932015-01-09T22:06:35.085+01:002015-01-09T22:06:35.085+01:00I think you mean Onion algebra. I think you mean Onion algebra. Jesterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08947218566941608850noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2846514233477399562.post-24233817439387031582015-01-09T21:45:06.853+01:002015-01-09T21:45:06.853+01:00i dunno about naturalness - personally i suspect t...i dunno about naturalness - personally i suspect that it makes more sense to look at octonion algebra. It does seem to like Maxwell and thus generalizations of Maxwell like Yang Mills. It would be funny if dark matter comes in three generations with anti-dark matter, but not really fermions - but having color. Or maybe not.joel ricehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06048310899055838262noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2846514233477399562.post-25290250087931506522015-01-09T19:37:01.238+01:002015-01-09T19:37:01.238+01:00The plot shows the probability of finding new phys...The plot shows the probability of finding new physics at the LHC per unit of time, normalized to the maximum probability that occurs in early 2016. It's not entirely a joke. It is based on the LHC schedule, Madgraph simulations, and Nostradamus' prophecies. Jesterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08947218566941608850noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2846514233477399562.post-66870554661546094812015-01-09T18:31:51.131+01:002015-01-09T18:31:51.131+01:00Hello,
Can you explain your plot? What exactly is...Hello,<br /><br />Can you explain your plot? What exactly is plotted? The probability of discovering new physics in that year? How exactly did you calculate that?<br /><br />Perhaps the plot is a joke I didn't understand?!<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2846514233477399562.post-37178273423230822722015-01-09T17:45:33.420+01:002015-01-09T17:45:33.420+01:00It would be cool to have the same plot pushed back...It would be cool to have the same plot pushed back to 2008 :-)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2846514233477399562.post-71650905003461338452015-01-09T17:45:16.415+01:002015-01-09T17:45:16.415+01:00The neutrino masses and leptonic mixings are not r...The neutrino masses and leptonic mixings are not really part of the standard model, and maybe there will be more surprises in this sector. Also naturalness principle maybe taking a hit for the Higgs mass or gauge Hierarchy problem, but it is still a reliable guide where there is no multiverse/anthropic explanation, such as for the smallness of the strong CP phase.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com