Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

New Type of Particle May Have Been Found

Posted by kdawson on from the outside-the-pipe dept.

An anonymous reader writes "The LHC is out of commission, but the Tevatron collider at Fermilab is still chugging along, and may have just discovered a new type of particle that would signal new physics. New Scientist reports that the Tevatron's CDF detector has found muons that seem to have been created outside of the beam pipe that confines the protons and anti-protons being smashed together. The standard model can't explain the muons, and some speculate that 'an unknown particle with a lifetime of about 20 picoseconds was produced in the collision, traveled about 1 centimeter, through the side of the beam pipe, and then decayed into muons.' The hypothetical particle even seems to have the right mass to account for one theory of dark matter."

46 of 281 comments (clear)

  1. hardly news... by Tumbleweed · · Score: 3, Funny

    What do you think they make Peeps out of?!

    1. Re:hardly news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      No, a capacitor blew, so they had to de-cool the entire facility to get in and inspect it. Because it's coming into European winter, and the facility takes months to cool, they've had to wait until next year (I'm not sure why it doesn't work in winter, but I'm from warmer climes, so there's probably something about extreme colds I'm not aware of).

      That's because it takes a lot of electricity to cool the collider down. Europeans like to use a lot of electricity to keep their buildings warm in winter, which drives up the price of electricity. So they wait for summer when electricity is cheaper and the giant German solar panel farms are pumping out lots of jiggawatts.

    2. Re:hardly news... by thegnu · · Score: 3, Funny

      Sir, you have obviously never heard of the flux capacitor. Which is obviously the type of capacitor they blew.

      Obviously.

      --
      Please stop stalking me, bro.
  2. That's no muon... by verbalcontract · · Score: 4, Funny

    That's no muon, it's a space station!

    I'll show myself out.

    1. Re:That's no muon... by bunratty · · Score: 4, Funny

      Too late. You're caught in a tractor beam!

      --
      What a fool believes, he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.
    2. Re:That's no muon... by windsurfer619 · · Score: 4, Funny

      It's a trap!

    3. Re:That's no muon... by bar-agent · · Score: 3, Funny

      you guys are f#ckin dorks...

      Oh yeah? Well, eh chu ta to you, too, pal!

      --
      i'd hit it so hard, if you pulled me out you'd be the king of britain [bash.org]
  3. Peeps are made of by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Chewons

  4. One theory of dark matter eh? by Fluffeh · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The hypothetical particle even seems to have the right mass to account for one theory of dark matter."

    Not to ask the blatantly obvious, but if it's the right mass for one theory of dark matter, I can't help but wonder where they are all being produced. Given a life of 20 picoseconds, I can't imagine that there would be monstrous factories of these things all over the universe to account for the stupidly large amount of mass they are supposed to account for. How come we haven't found them before?

    --
    Moved to http://soylentnews.org/. You are invited to join us too!
    1. Re:One theory of dark matter eh? by zappepcs · · Score: 5, Insightful

      An absolutely good question. I've been wondering about the effect of radiation from GRBs, blackholes, and other radiation sources in the Universe for a while now. That radiation must have an effect other than raising the ambient temperature a little bit. Even if the radiation is not enough to fry all life on this planet, it's possible that radiation may have an effect on the Sun's activity... which in turn directly affects our climate.

      I do understand that the collider is a bit different than our Sun, but does anyone know what effect gamma ray bursts have on the efficacy or activity of our Sun?

      With all the hubbub about global warming, I've been getting more interested in what affect our planet's climate. Recently we have found/discovered a few things that might have some effect. While it seems a small thing at best, what is not known is the effect of combined events (or lack of) from outside our solar system on how our Sun behaves.

      Note: I am not convinced that man has not contributed to climate change. I simply am not convinced that we truly understand how and what controls our climate. I'd like to know all the factors that have nothing to do with mankind's interference. Until we do, there is no method to fully describe the climate model, nor predict any change to it.

      --
      Support NYCountryLawyer RIAA vs People
    2. Re:One theory of dark matter eh? by mpsheppa · · Score: 5, Informative

      Not to ask the blatantly obvious, but if it's the right mass for one theory of dark matter, I can't help but wonder where they are all being produced. Given a life of 20 picoseconds, I can't imagine that there would be monstrous factories of these things all over the universe to account for the stupidly large amount of mass they are supposed to account for. How come we haven't found them before?

      I thought the same thing at first, but the article states that they are theorizing that the particle produced is not a dark matter particle itself, but rather the particle that carries forces between dark matter particles. It is entirely possible that there are stable dark-matter particles, but for the force-carrying particles to be unstable when produced in isolation.

    3. Re:One theory of dark matter eh? by Shark · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The first thing to realise, regardless of which side of the debate you are, is that there is a lot more politics than science being done on climate change.

      I believe this is why the acceptable term has now become 'climate change' rather than 'global warming'.

      I'm pretty certain that we do influence the climate. But Parent has a very good point that argument without all the facts is still nothing more than rhetoric.

      There are plenty of theories on either side of that debate, but way too much political pressure (agenda?) to even allow for any form of educated and intelligent debate.

      Whoever thinks this is Al Gore vs. Big Oil definitely hasn't looked into it deeply enough.

      If you want to reduce CO2, *plant trees*. Elaborating a CO2 tax scam is merely a tool for social control.

      --
      Mind the frickin' laser...
    4. Re:One theory of dark matter eh? by zappepcs · · Score: 3, Interesting

      kipman, I did not ask for an explanation of global warming. I am curious as to what effects space radiation has on our solar system, and in turn, our planet. Feel free to assume that every conversation about the planet earth is or should be able man's contribution to the global warming effect. You may also feel free to consider that there is more to science than answering politically charge questions. More often than not scientists simply want to answer a question to know the answer... whatever their personal beliefs. I'm not confused at all. I'm not looking for a cause of global warming. I'm asking what effects various types of radiation have on our Sun and solar system... and in turn, on our planet.

      Until not long ago it was not thought that anything escaped a black hole, now we know different. Fortunately we've not been in the middle of the full force of some of that radiation in the past few hundred million years (that we know of). There are some fantastically energetic radiation sources in the Universe, and understanding how they might affect us is an important thing. Perhaps as important or more so than tracking any objects that might collide with the Earth.

      Now, we find new particles and the question is how do they interact with other matter in the Universe/Solar System. What effect will they have on our understanding of physics etc. Your dismissal of the thought is rather boorish. This might bring you close to being up to speed: http://www.jrmooneyham.com/ctctgam.html or at least give you a clue.

      --
      Support NYCountryLawyer RIAA vs People
    5. Re:One theory of dark matter eh? by ceoyoyo · · Score: 5, Informative

      More than possible. Of the force carrying particles we know of, only the photon is stable. The graviton, if it exists, should be stable. But the W+/-, Z and all the various flavours of gluons are unstable.

    6. Re:One theory of dark matter eh? by cowscows · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'm not an astrophysicist, or a physicist of any kind, but just thinking about this a little bit, I don't think the effects on the sun would be too significant. Or at least, anything that would significantly affect the sun would likely significantly affect the earth directly as well.

      The sun is so much larger, it has so much more mass in which to dissipate any energy that it receives. And either way, it's producing such a large amount of energy that I'd imagine whatever it receives from outside sources is just a drop in the bucket.

      --

      One time I threw a brick at a duck.

    7. Re:One theory of dark matter eh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      But Parent has a very good point that argument without all the facts is still nothing more than rhetoric.

      With respect, thats not necessarily a very good point at all.

      The OP, for example, illustrates that we don't have all the facts regarding particle physics.

      The application of your "very good point" to this would result in our concluding that anything involving particle physics is "nothing more than rhetoric".

      Taking a slightly broader view, one can conclude that either all scientific fields are "nothing more than rhetoric", or that one can in fact, draw meaningful conclusions in the absence of all of the facts.

      I would humbly submit that evidence overwhelmingly supports the latter position.

      It may be true to say that in the abesence of sufficient facts, one has nothing but rhetoric, or that the confidence we can have in and the accuracy of conclusions is proportional to the completeness of the facts on which they are based...but thats an entirely different position to the one you took.

      The question, regarding climate change (and, perhaps more importantly, the anthropogenic aspects thereof) is not whether we have all facts or not, but rather whehter or not we have sufficient facts from which to draw meaningful conclusions.

  5. please let it be the higgs boson by LingNoi · · Score: 5, Funny

    I wish it was the god particle, rendering the whole point of building the LHC an epic fail. It would just be deliciously ironic.

    1. Re:please let it be the higgs boson by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      If the standard model is wrong, there are almost certainly more particles to be found at higher and higher energies (see any website that is pulled up by googling "beyond the standard model"). And the tevatron isn't likely to probe much higher energies...

    2. Re:please let it be the higgs boson by Alioth · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It wouldn't render the whole point of building the LHC an epic fail. Read Richard Feynman's chapter on "cargo cult science" (the last chapter of "Surely You're Joking Mr Feynman") as for why you don't stop repeating an experiment just because someone's already done it. It's unbelievably bad science to just stop doing an experiment because it's been done before.

      --
      Oolite: Elite-like game. For Mac, Linux and Windows
  6. Now they just need one more thing by Rogerborg · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Someone to replicate their results.

    Oops!

    --
    If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
  7. More data, less hype at arxiv by jfengel · · Score: 5, Informative

    The New Scientist article points to a paper at arxiv:

    http://arxiv.org/abs/0810.5357

    with the rather less sensational title:

    Study of multi-muon events produced in p-pbar collisions at sqrt(s)=1.96 TeV

    I'm amused to note that the author list stretches over three pages, which I gather is common for this sort of paper.

    1. Re:More data, less hype at arxiv by PalmHair · · Score: 5, Funny

      Femilab studies multi-moan events produced with p-bar colisions and squirts? Reminds me of the end-of-the-world party I hosted just before the LHC was fired up. Let me tell you - I regret nothing, apart from not wearing a condom. You will say I am narrow-minded and too much focused on sex. It is not me, it is the world around me, I say. The first-ever artifical satelite to circle the Earth was in a shape of a four-tailed spermatozoid. The ultimate scientific triumph of the western world - the Apollo mission was lifted by the Saturn-5 rockets - the biggest phallic symbol ever made by the man. And now the Large H Collider that comes with the promise of pushing the entire Earth into a black hole - the most ultimate sexual act ever. Yes, I am a nerd and if you are reading this, you can be sure you are one too. Science and technology are made up by people like us - to substitute in a cowardly way what every man is supposed to live for - fast cars and beautiful women. Cheers!

  8. Fermilab Maternity Ward by EEPROMS · · Score: 4, Funny

    Doctor " Congratulations professor!! you have a new bouncing baby particle"
    Professor "look at those electrons, its hung like a horse"
    Doctor "eer, sorry to disappoint your sir but that is just residual background noise"

  9. CV by Mogget03 · · Score: 5, Informative

    John Conway talks about this over at Cosmic Variance: http://cosmicvariance.com/2008/11/02/cdf-ghost-muons/

  10. Re:coincidence? by compro01 · · Score: 5, Informative

    The Tevatron is big money science. the LHC is bigger money science.

    --
    upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
  11. Re:coincidence? by harlows_monkeys · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Warning: the following is from memory, so details may be off. The gist of it is correct.

    There's a section in "Surely You're Joking, Mr. Feynman" where he goes to see the collider at the new school he's just arrived at. The collider at the school he came from is state of the art, so he's expecting something even better at the new school, because they have been producing many remarkable, cutting edge, results.

    The collider he finds is small, and far from state of the art, and almost held together by duct tape and chewing gum. He realizes that this is why it has produced such remarkable results--the scientists that work with it are very hands on, getting down and dirty with the experiments, coaxing every last bit out of them. The scientists using the shiny new state of the art collider are sitting back in their offices, just getting disembodied data that they haven't really connected with, and don't understand on a gut level like their colleagues using the "inferior" equipment do.

    Feynman knew then he was going to happy at the new school.

  12. Re:coincidence? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I work in electrical engineering, and unfortunately very few people play with scopes and irons anymore. "Hardware" engineering is mostly abstract concept juggling on computers these days.

    I'm the guy with the 45 year old tube scope with Nixie tube digital readout and the two soldering irons...

  13. New Physics by sexconker · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I conjecture that it's the same old physics, and that we only understand it a bit better.

    1. Re:New Physics by ThanatosMinor · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I conjecture that it's the same old physics, and that we only understand it a bit better.

      Physics is not Truth, nor is it nature or reality. It is an attempt at a scientific model of nature. When we only had Newtonian mechanics, General relativity was new physics. New models, new math, new science, same reality.

  14. maybe they could rename it by circletimessquare · · Score: 4, Funny

    the deliciously ironic particle

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    1. Re:maybe they could rename it by fredrikj · · Score: 3, Funny

      Should they need a new quantum number, irony would make a nice flavor.

  15. Re:The little particle that could... by CorporateSuit · · Score: 4, Funny

    Poor little guy gets a single centimeter in 20 picoseconds-time and poofs into nothingness

    I can already see the spam... "P4rticl3 not going far enough? Last longer! Natur4l P4rticle eh4ncement!"

    --
    I am the richest astronaut ever to win the superbowl.
  16. Very exciting, but... by exp(pi*sqrt(163)) · · Score: 4, Insightful

    > The hypothetical particle even seems to have the right mass to account for one theory of dark matter.

    That may say more about the number of theories of dark matter than about this particle.

    --
    Doesn't it make you feel good to know that our freedoms are protected by politicans, lawyers and journalists.
  17. Re:coincidence? by buchner.johannes · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The work is a ongoing one. You take measures all the time, it's not just one shot.

    That's why I will believe the summary when a significant amount of particles fit for scientifically publication (say, 20) are detected.

    Working against measurement mistakes and systematic errors should not be underestimated.

    --
    NB: The message above might reflect my opinion right now, but not necessarily tomorrow or next year.
  18. I'm glad they found it by Dan+East · · Score: 4, Funny

    "Particle May Have Been Found "

    It is really good - and amazing - that they found this particle. I've lost sub-atomic particles before, and the things are just so incredibly small that it is unbelievably difficult to find them again. The resulting migraine from eye-strain can be terrible.

    --
    Better known as 318230.
  19. Re:coincidence? by domanova · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Interesting. I'd guess that the Tev and the SPS (which is now the LHC injector) are sort of the-same-money physics, in real terms, as the LHC. But I don't know. The SSC, which was going to reach higher energy than the LHC, got far too expensive, mostly because of gross mismanagement. Disclaimer: I've worked on all the mentioned machines, and the demise of SSC http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superconducting_Super_Collider hurt a lot.

    --
    Down with categorical imperatives
  20. Re:coincidence? by symbolset · · Score: 5, Informative

    The real stuff has gotten pretty tough. I had the challenge once to rework a preproduction board to prove a design change. I was way out of my comfort zone.

    Resistors these days are the size of a juvenile flea. If you drop one, let it go man... it's gone. ICs aren't much better. You have to use IPA and a lintfree cloth just to clean the soldering tweezers. It takes a 60x microscope and a steady hand. I was really regretting my caffeine habit. And the tiny static charges make everything sticky. The leadfree solder takes more heat so you have to be extra careful not so bake the components to death. And don't stab yourself with the tweezers. They look like pencil erasers in the scope but they'll penetrate your skin with no resistance, burning the whole way.

    It worked. It wasn't pretty, but it worked. I am thrilled to have had the experience. I wish I knew a vendor for the surgical point soldering tweezers.

    Respect to the asian ladies in the factory that do this all day for a pittance, with nothing more than a magnifying glass and grim determination.

    --
    Help stamp out iliturcy.
  21. Re:coincidence? by symbolset · · Score: 4, Informative

    They do for the most part. But almost inevitably somebody makes 200,000 circuit boards, only to discover that something doesn't work and it to be reworked. Three resistors, a capacitor and an IO connector have to be changed. It's boring work in a toxic environment under appalling conditions. But it's got to be done if you want that new BluRay player under your tree.

    --
    Help stamp out iliturcy.
  22. 1 cm in 20 pico secs..? not so fast..?! by v4vijayakumar · · Score: 5, Interesting

    an unknown particle with a lifetime of about 20 picoseconds was produced in the collision, traveled about 1 centimeter

    That is 16000 times faster than light..!

    1. Re:1 cm in 20 pico secs..? not so fast..?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      The statement in the article is correct!

      The (half) life-time of a particle is the time measured with a clock traveling with the particle, which slows down when approaching the light speed c. Hence the path it 'survives' becomes longer.

      That's relativity.

    2. Re:1 cm in 20 pico secs..? not so fast..?! by JohnFluxx · · Score: 4, Informative

      Your math is way off. Using google:

      (20 picoseconds) * c = 0.599584916 centimeters

      Given that
      1) 20 picoseconds is a half-life
      2) Time slows down for the muons.

      It's not surprising that they travelled about 1cm.

  23. Re:coincidence? by krlynch · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Digikey sells them. They're pretty cheap:

    http://dkc3.digikey.com/PDF/T083/P2246.pdf

  24. The X(3872) Particle by Rocketship+Underpant · · Score: 5, Interesting

    There are several mysterious particles that aren't easily identified by the Standard Model. One in particular is the X(3872) particle, which was discovered by Japanese scientists and confirmed by other laboratories. It might be a tetraquark particle or even a meson molecule, but scientists are just guessing for now.

    http://www.symmetrymagazine.org/breaking/2008/04/13/the-charming-case-of-x3872/

    --
    He who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me.
  25. Re:coincidence? by arodland · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I just find it odd that with the introduction of a new collider this one has finally found something.

    Right, because the Tevatron hasn't found anything at all in the past 25 years. Ever hear of the top quark? Remember that article a year ago about the "Cascade B" particle? You may have seen it, it was on Slashdot.

  26. Re:1 Centimeter in 20 Picoseconds... by JohnFluxx · · Score: 3, Interesting

    1) 20 picoseconds is a half life (so it has a 50% chance of decaying every 20 picoseconds).

    2) Time slows down for a fast moving particle. This was one of the first pieces of evidence for special relativity:
    http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/Relativ/muon.html

  27. Chewan source by John+Bayko · · Score: 3, Funny

    I live in Saskatoon, Saskatchewan. Chewans are mined near here. The province is named after them.