Sunday, December 06, 2015

ATLAS, CMS will present results from 2015 on December 15th

Update: I will write another text about the \(750\GeV\) bump in a week.
Apparently in the main CERN auditorium, 3 pm

As I have repeatedly stressed, e.g. in this summary of the 2015 LHC run, the Large Hadron Collider has performed a large enough number of collisions at the energy that was substantially higher than the energy achieved in 2012.
Rumor: Adam Falkowski made a rumor public via Twitter (@Resonaances) so: both CMS and ATLAS see a modest excess in the diphoton, \(\gamma\gamma\) spectrum, at the mass of \(700\GeV\). A new Higgs boson previously seen as a \(662\GeV\) bump? \(700\GeV\) is the maximum second Higgs mass in certain 2-Higgs models.
That's why we have entered a completely new territory where new discoveries may rather easily be made. In other words, when you see nothing new at the energy \(E\), you will probably see nothing at \(E+\delta E\) because they are similar and the results are correlated. But if you study the energy \(13E/8\) instead, it's a whole new game. Many things at this higher energy/mass may show up although they were inaccessible in the past.

New things and phenomena could have very well been found, I have always stressed, and they just need to be processed and announced. When will we hear a coherent story about the results of 2015?

Three weeks ago, Adam Falkowski who is familiar with some planning of events at CERN pointed out that they should prepare something new for the mid December which is why in the early December, rumors could have been expected to start to circulate.

But what are the dates of the possible announcements that "we have clearly seen nothing and we're ready to hang ourselves" or something more exciting? Ken Bloom, a computing guy at the CMS, has finally revealed the date:
What have we learned from the LHC in 2015? (Quantum Diaries)

It is Tuesday, December 15th, 2015.
I have many reasons to cancel events on that day and listen carefully. One of them is that they only have 9 days left to prepare the documents and agree with what they will say. So the "raw physics results" must already exist and Bloom must probably know them at this moment because the interval is rather short.

And Dr Bloom spent quite a lot of time talking about the possibility that they will announce something.
If there is anything to hope for next week, it is some evidence for new, heavy particles. Because the collision energy has been increased from 8 TeV to 13 TeV, the ability to create a heavy particle of a given mass has increased too. A little fooling around with the “Collider Reach” tool (which I had discussed here) suggests that even as little data as we have in hand now can give us improved chances of observing such particles now compared to the chances in the entire Run 1 dataset as long as the particle masses are above about 3 TeV. Of course there are many theories that predict the existence of such particles, the most famous of which is supersymmetry. But so far there has been scant evidence of any new phenomena in previous datasets. If we were to get even a hint of something at a very high mass, it would definitely focus our scientific efforts for 2016, where we might get about ten times as much data as we did this year.

Will we get that hint, like we did with the Higgs boson four years ago? Tune in on December 15 to find out!
Obviously, Dr Bloom may be bullšiting while he already knows that they have nothing interesting to announce on December 15th. But in that case, it's a lot of bullšiting, I think. He explicitly mentions the mass scale where something new could be observed and he reminds us – and those who still failed to notice – that the most "famous" proposal for a new kind of physics is supersymmetry.

The last short paragraph is the coolest one, however. Will they show a similar hint as they did four years ago? Note that on December 12th, 2011, we already knew that the previous December 3rd rumors were accurate and ATLAS, especially in the diphoton channel, saw a strong hint of a \(125\GeV\) Higgs boson. Two days later, on December 14th, 2011, I stressed that the Higgs boson of approximately this mass was a sure thing. Some people disagreed, the official discovery only came 7 months later, but that's when I won a $500 Higgs bet.

We're four years older now and Bloom says that "it could be similar like four years ago". If it were similar, it would be a breakthrough because they would see strong enough hints of Beyond the Standard Model physics and not just a boring Standard Model Higgs. Were there similar rumors circulating on December 3rd, 2015 as they were on December 3rd, 2011? I can't say and we can't collectively know.

Why did Bloom compare 2015 to 2011 and not e.g. to 2014, 2013, 2010, 2009, 2008, and the previous decade or three when nothing new was discovered? And why is he talking about the "directing of the 2016 search" according to December 15th, 2015? No, I am not trying to desperately find something deep in Bloom's wording. He just wants us to watch so that we don't miss something. But other strange things occurred in recent weeks.

On November 23rd, 2015 an enemy of supersymmetry and string theory Tommaso Dorigo of CMS posted the following unexpectedly pro-SUSY and seemingly off-topic blog post:
Supersymmetry Is About To Be Discovered, Kane Says
The words "Kane says" refer to the "present tense" or what's the name of it, don't they? He wrote that he was finalizing a book but why would he pick exactly this topic, especially because the claims by Kane were said more than 1 years ago and 4 years ago, respectively? Check the dates of his references. Is that right to use the present tense at all?

And why would he pick a particular paragraph such as this one:
Now that we can predict the gluino mass from compactified M theory we know that superpartners should not have been expected in LHC Run 1 because the gluino mass is about \(1.5\TeV\), and it will appear in Run 2 once the luminosity gets over 15-20 fb-1.
Gordon has written about many things, not only about a mass of a vampire alchemist particle named the gluino, right? And why would Dorigo start to talk about the distribution of the Nobel prize for supersymmetry now? And why would he dedicate two sentences to finding a particular particle on the particular years – a year whose "plan" may be affected by the hints according to Bloom as well? Aren't the experimenters collecting hints and chance to make a discovery at every moment? Can't they get a hint on 2016 and a discovery at 2017?

And I've run into some papers and graphs I had missed in the past, like this paper and the Figure 1a. Cool, more than a 3-sigma combined excess for a gluino around \(1.2\TeV\) I hadn't known about.

These are some of the reasons – I don't claim that the list above is comprehensive – why I will try to dedicate December 15th to the CERN events. You're invited to do the same thing.

No comments:

Post a Comment