New Particle?

Other people do the phenomenology stuff much better than me so I don’t try to compete. See e.g. here, here and here, and now it’s also here, here, herehere, here, here and finally here . However, sometimes I like to see my plots without those fitted lines that lead the eye

I can always add my own alternative bumps


Or maybe…


20 Responses to New Particle?

  1. Hi Phil,

    bloggers seem to have reacted almost instantaneously!

    I just added my own comments to my blog. TGD based interpretation is in terms of exotic weak boson octet predicted by TGD based explanation of family replication phenomenon. Corresponding octet for gluons could explain the strange forward-backward asymmetry in ttbar production. The basic prediction is neutral flavor changing currents obeying dynamical SU(3) symmetry.

    See my blog posting and the earlier posting about ttbar anomaly.

    Matti Pitkanen

    • Ray Munroe says:

      Hi Matti,

      In Section 7.2 of my book (http://www.lulu.com/product/paperback/new-approaches-towards-a-grand-unified-theory/2903242 and click on “preview under cover picture for a free partial preview), I proposed a Hyperflavor-Electroweak force to define right-handed neutrinos with non-zero quantum numbers. That idea also predicts an exotic Z and some exotic W’s. Ultimately, I expect these exotic bosons to have a connection with the origin of fermionic mass (Higgs Theory explains the origin of Z and W mass and longitudinal degrees-of-freedom well, but not 3 generations of fermions so well), so a mass-scale comparable to the top mass is interesting…

  2. Bill K says:

    As Feynman said, “If a curve goes down at both ends, there must be a bump somewhere in the middle.”

  3. Kea says:

    ROFLOL! Thanks for the laugh! Don’t apply for a job with the LHC any time soon, heh?

    • Philip Gibbs says:

      I’ve looked at the recruitment video for CERN and it is very ageist. I was left with the impression that anyone over 25 should not bother to apply, even though age discrimination is illegal in the EU. LOL.

  4. Kea says:

    Age discrimination is illegal throughout the Western world. I could probably sue about 1000 different academics, who tell me things like, “we are getting many young applicants for this position”, etc. etc. I should have shot myself when I turned 40, since I am clearly a burden on both the older baby boomers and the younger generation.

    • Carl Brannen says:

      Fortunately, it appears that they let us old folks work on experiments.

      • Kea says:

        Yes, the point being that the older folks are the ones who populated all the academic positions when they were first created post WWII.

  5. [...] (7 abr. 2011): Más entradas sobre este tema aquí, aquí, aquí, aquí, aquí, aquí, aquí, aquí, aquí, aquí y aquí. Obviamente, al final [...]

    • Ray Munroe says:

      Dear Francis (th)E mule,

      “Leptophobic” indeed! LEP2 should have detected any significant Z’ -> lepton signals in this mass range.

      Have Fun!

  6. Lawrence B. Crowell says:

    According to the collaboration paper the signal in the data is 3.2 sigma, which means some additional work is probably required. Too bad in a way the FNAL is closing down so soon.

  7. To Ray Munro,

    the enormously important data bit that I learned yesterday is that the new particle favors decays to quark pairs. This explanation requires exotic Z coupling preferentially to quark pairs. The Z’ model indeed assumes this; I do not about your proposal. This data bit kills the TGD based explanation is in terms of an octet of exotic weak gauge bosons predicted by topological explanation of family replication phenomenon.

    The preference of quarks over leptons strongly suggests that strong interactions are involved and second explanation is in terms of 15 year old of a scaled up copy of hadron physics whose proton would have mass around 512 GeV. The pions of this physics would be produced abundantly and charged pion would decay to W and quark pairs in accordance with the basic observation. The mass of the pion would be by naive scaling 71.7 GeV but p-adic scaling by factor two is possible and produces 143.4 GeV mass: Lubos mentions 145 GeV mass as the most probable estimate. Monochromatic pair of photons from the decay of neutral scaled up pion is one signature which might be easy to test.

    The predicted exotic octet of gluons could actually correspond to the gluons of the scaled up variant of hadron physics. M_107 hadron physics would correspond only ordinary gluons and M_89 only to the exotic octet of gluons. This would give a connection with the TGD based explanation of the backward-forward asymmetry in the production of top pairs. In the collision incoming quarks of proton and antiproton would topologically condense at M_89 hadronic space-time sheet and scatter by the exchange of exotic octet of gluons: the exchange between quark and antiquark would not destroy the information about directions of incoming and outgoing beams as s-channel annihilation would do and one would obtain the asymmetry.

    For details see my blog posting

    Matti Pitkanen

    • Lawrence B. Crowell says:

      Many years ago I did a study of a version of the Pati-Salaam model with SU(2)xSU(2) for two chiralities. The breaking of one SU(2) to its Cartan group and the Nishijima angle rotation to give chirality to one SU(2) predicted what I called the Z_γ particle. This Z_γ resulted from what would otherwise be charged photons from the broken SU(2) which annihilated each other at energy below the Higgs condensate energy. The mass was about in this range.

      That was a long time ago. I suppose if there is something in these data that there will be a herd of folks with different theories which predicted this or something like it.

      Cheers LC

      • Ray Munroe says:

        Dear Matti and Lawrence,

        Yes – The Pati-Salam Weak sector may be represented as an SU(2)_L x SU(2)_R. My Hyperflavor-Electroweak is a generalization of Pati-Salam Weak from the equivalent of a product of two SU(2)’s into one SU(4) that contains all of these Pati-Salam Weak interactions plus more.

        The Pati-Salam SU(2)_R should have the equivalent of a Z’ or a W’_0 that couples to right-handed particles.

        Recall that Super-Kamiokande’s discovery of neutrino oscillations implies that all neutrinos have mass. If a neutrino has mass, then it must always travel below c. If we have a left-handed neutrino traveling at, say, 0.99999 c, then we can Lorentz transform ahead of the neutrino at, say, 0.999999 c, look back at the neutrino, and observe the opposite spin in our new reference frame – a right-handed neutrino.

        If this Z’ or W’_0 has a dominant leptonic decay into right-handed neutrinos (recall that the dominant leptonic Z decays are into left-handed neutrinos), then LEP2 would not have observed these decays because right-handed neutrinos have zero Electroweak and Color couplings and would have extremely weak Gravitational couplings with the Detector/ Calorimeter materials (i.e right-handed neutrinos are “sterile” to Supercollider Physics).

        Thus, Francis (th)E mule’s “lepto-phobic” description of such a Z’ seems quite reasonable. A Supercollider would most likely observe this Z’ or W’_0 decaying into right-handed quarks (i.e. hadronic jets).

        My concern with these results is that the discovery statistics depend so heavily on the jet energy scaling. An error with energy bins might accidentally “fake” a discovery. Remember Cold Fusion?

        I will remain optimistically skeptical until the LHC can give an independent confirmation.

        Have Fun!

      • Lawrence B. Crowell says:

        There is some reason to think there might be some Z’ or what id called Z_γ waiting in the wings to give some higher symmetry to physics. It may either come from an SU(2)xSU(2) theory or maybe from an SU(3)xU(1) theory, where here there is at high energy a corresponding SU(3) to the QCD SU(3). This model is possible with respect to axion theories with CP violations.

        However, this data blip will have to await further confirmation before I would start getting really excited about things. I suppose it is a disease of the digital age that things “go viral” almost instantly.

        Cheers LC

  8. Philip Gibbs says:

    I am really very skeptical about this result. I don’t think there is even much point trying to fit models to it.

    The two bumps that are clear to the eye are statistically too good to be true given the size of the error bars.

    The points that mark the highs and lows most clearly are well outside the fit line. This is an indication that the signal is not really as clear as the eye makes it look.

    The analysis shows it to be a 3.3 sigma effect which is not impressive given the number of plots they look at.

    Other channels and other experiments do not show a corresponding signal that should be there if this is real.

    CDF have only used a small part of their data. If it was real they should be able to check it with more data quickly.

    I think they are right to publish any effects of this size but people are giving it too much weight just because the points happen to line up to show nice bumps. Fermilab have not said anything to mislead but at the same time I think they should use more words of caution to reflect the real status of this observation.

    • Lawrence B. Crowell says:

      I tend to agree. I would not hold my breath for very long on this. I think the LHC guys may comb their data to see if they got anything like this.

      LC

  9. First observations are of course first observations. The evidence for top quark asymmetry is also there can be also understood in terms of new hadron physics and two anomalies related to each other is much more than single anomaly. Those who predict something are of course excited about the possibility that predictions might find experimental verification. LHC will show!

    And on basis of very general internal consistency arguments we know that new physics must be there. The question is only what this new physics is.

  10. I made an estimate for the decay width of the M_89 pion: the decay to two gluons +W boson and quark pair +W boson (box diagram with for gluonic edges and one edge emitting W boson which turns out to dominate). It turns out that width is of order 20 GeV if one has flavor octet of gluons. Therefore the model passes the first killer test. This is highly encouraging but of course does not prove anything and I am ready to accept that the bump is a fake.

    See
    http://matpitka.blogspot.com/2011/04/is-decay-width-of-new-150-gev-particle.html .

  11. Dear Ray,

    good that you mentioned cold fusion. I have had intention to write about it but had not had time.

    Cold fusion has made a lot of progress and now it is again accepted by American Chemical Society as respectable science. For instance, high energy protons resulting in the process have been observed directly. Italians made the latest progress and two Swedish physics professors could not but admit that cold nuclear fusion seems to be in question. See this

    http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_miljo/energi/article3144827.ece.

    Best Regards,

    Matti

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 276 other followers

%d bloggers like this: