Slashdot Mirror


Physicists Detect Whiff of New Particle At the Large Hadron Collider (sciencemag.org)

sciencehabit quotes a report from Science Magazine: For decades, particle physicists have yearned for physics beyond their tried-and-true standard model. Now, they are finding signs of something unexpected at the Large Hadron Collider (LHC), the world's biggest atom smasher at CERN, the European particle physics laboratory near Geneva, Switzerland. The hints come not from the LHC's two large detectors, which have yielded no new particles since they bagged the last missing piece of the standard model, the Higgs boson, in 2012, but from a smaller detector, called LHCb, that precisely measures the decays of familiar particles. The latest signal involves deviations in the decays of particles called B mesons -- weak evidence on its own. But together with other hints, it could point to new particles lying on the high-energy horizon. "This has never happened before, to observe a set of coherent deviations that could be explained in a very economical way with one single new physics contribution," says Joaquim Matias, a theorist at the Autonomous University of Barcelona in Spain. B mesons are made of fundamental particles called quarks. Familiar protons and neutrons are made of two flavors of quarks, up and down, bound in trios. Heavier quark flavors -- charm, strange, top, and bottom -- can be created, along with their antimatter counterparts, in high-energy particle collisions; they pair with antiquarks to form mesons. In their latest result, reported today in a talk at CERN, LHCb physicists find that when one type of B meson decays into a K meson, its byproducts are skewed: The decay produces a muon (a cousin of the electron) and an antimuon less often than it makes an electron and a positron. In the standard model, those rates should be equal, says Guy Wilkinson, a physicist at the University of Oxford in the United Kingdom and spokesperson for the 770-member LHCb team. The new data suggest the bottom quark might morph directly into a strange quark -- a change the standard model forbids -- by spitting out a new particle called a Z9 boson. That hypothetical cousin of the Z boson would be the first particle beyond the standard model and would add a new force to theory. The extra decay process would lower production of muons, explaining the anomaly.

5 of 180 comments (clear)

  1. good writeup from mfb by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    ..over on physicforums.

    https://www.physicsforums.com/...

  2. Re:Smell-o-vision by king+neckbeard · · Score: 4, Informative

    Mosts atoms smells like plum pudding.

    --
    This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
  3. Physicists are getting desperate by mjpvirtual · · Score: 3, Informative

    A year and a half ago, a 3.5 sigma 750 GeV bump appeared in the LHC data. New physics was heralded and a hundred theoretical papers attempting to explain it appeared. It was a statistical fluke and disappeared as more data was collected.

    Now we're faced with a 2 sigma anomaly and the shouts of new physics are once again repeated. This is even more likely to be noise.

    Physicists have been predicting new physics for 30 years. It was a major justification for the promotion of the LHC project. Nothing has been found. There's a lot of desperation at work here. It's sad.

    For a good summary of all of this from a CERN experimentalist who called the 750 GeV noise, see Tommaso Dorigo

    1. Re: Physicists are getting desperate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      A lot of new research , knowledge and papers are coming out of LHC - you just don't hear about it because it is so esoteric. Hell even 'ancient' Fermilab is still operating and doing useful but mind-numbing-to-layman research.

    2. Re:Physicists are getting desperate by Lord+Crc · · Score: 5, Informative

      Now we're faced with a 2 sigma anomaly and the shouts of new physics are once again repeated. This is even more likely to be noise.

      From what I understand the main difference between the 750GeV bump and this anomaly is that the 750GeV was a single bump which did not have a nice-fitting theoretical explanation while still being compatible with existing measurements.

      This anomaly might only ~2 sigma so far, but it is ~2 sigma in several channels, so not just "one bump", and it seems one can rather easily and naturally extend the theory to match observations.

      https://arxiv.org/abs/1703.09189