Posted on 07/13/2010 5:25:48 AM PDT by lbryce
Tommaso Dorigo, a physicist at the University of Padua, has said in his blog that there has been talk coming out of the Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory in Batavia, Illinois, that the Higgs has been discovered.
The Tevatron, the huge particle accelerator at Fermi - the most powerful in the world after the LHC - is expected to be retired when the CERN accelerator becomes fully operational, but may have struck a final blow before it becomes obsolete.
If one form of the rumour is to be believed - and Prof Dorigo is extremely circumspect about it - then it is a "three-sigma" signature, meaning that there is a statistical likelihood of 99.7 per cent that it is correct. But, of course, that is only if the rumour is to be believed.
In the post, titled "Rumors about a light Higgs", Prof Dorigo said: "It reached my ear, from two different, possibly independent sources, that an experiment at the Tevatron is about to release some evidence of a light Higgs boson signal.
"Some say a three-sigma effect, others do not make explicit claims but talk of a unexpected result."
While media attention has been focusing on the LHC, the Tevatron has been quietly plugging away in the search for Higgs. In the 27 years since it was first completed (it has been regularly upgraded since then) it has discovered a quark and observed four different baryons. While it has not been able to pinpoint the elusive Higgs, it has narrowed the search, reducing the window of possible masses where it might be found.
Last year, Fermi physicists said they expected to have enough data to find or rule out the Higgs by early next year, and gave themselves a fifty-fifty chance of finding it before the end of 2010.
(Excerpt) Read more at telegraph.co.uk ...
Ok, I’ll say it.
I’M STUNED! THIS IS HUGH and SERIES!!!
Please, then, allow me to explain:
Particle Physics Overview Overview Particle Physics is a constantly changing science. It seeks to understand the fundamental building blocks of everything - the particles that cannot be broken down into anything else. Over the decades, it has spawned many new sciences based upon what it once thought was fundamental. Here you will find a relatively complete overview of particle physics. This page will not delve too much into the mathematics nor physics of the subject - there are many college and graduate school classes that teach this - but you will be able to learn about the basics, and you will be able to find enough information here in order to understand the terminology in the rest of the site. This page starts from the ground up, starting with the fundamental forces and then building up with Bosons and Fermions. Then, the page talks about heavier particles that are made of parts of quarks, continuing with a brief discussion of atomic physics, and culminating with a discussion of antimatter. Fundamental Forces There are four "fundamental" forces that we know of. Again, by fundamental, this is what current physicists believe every force is a representation of, and can be fundamentally be broken down into. They are:
Chart information from http://cpepweb.org/. Bosons Bosons go hand-in-hand with the Fundamental Forces discussed above, for they are the actual particles that carry the forces. They have an integer spin (0, 1, 2, ...). The photon, symbolized by "γ," is probably the particle that most people are familiar with. Usually, it is thought of as a particle of light, but it is also the carrier of the electromagnetic force. It has 0 electric charge, and 0 mass. It has a spin of 1. The gluon, symbolized by "g", is the carrier of the Fundamental Strong Nuclear Force. It has 0 electric charge and 0 mass. It has a spin of 1. The carriers of the Weak Nuclear Force are W+, W-, and Z0 particles. They have a spin of 1, as well, and electric charges of +1, -1, and 0, respectively. Their masses are 80.4 GeV, 80.4 GeV, and 91.187 GeV, respectively. The carrier of Gravity is the theoretical particle of the graviton. It has not yet been proven to exist; its theoretical spin is 2 and electric charge 0. Fermions Fermions are the constituents of matter as we know it. What classifies them is that they have a half-spin (1/2, 3/2, 5/2, ...). The two sub-categories of fermions are Leptons and Quarks. Leptons have integer electric charges while quarks have third electric charges.
Leptons The Standard Model currently holds six different leptons, all called "flavors," all of which have a lepton number of 1. There are the electron, muon, and tau particles, along with their associated neutrinos. Theoretically, neutrinos are massless. If you note above, there are not masses noted for them -- it is just known that they do not have a mass above that stated. Several experiments are currently attempting to determine if the neutrinos have mass by determining the precise number of each type that is received from the sun. If the numbers differ from those predicted, then either models of solar neutrino generation are wrong or neutrinos have switched flavor on the way to Earth. If they have switched flavor, then theory demands that they have mass. The muon and its antiparticle are formed naturally by the decay in the upper atmosphere of pions that are produced by cosmic rays: The muon is a very unstable particle that can decay from either an electron or a positron in the following fasion: Quarks As with leptons, there are six flavors of quarks that fall into three pairs, all of which have a baryon number of 1/3. They are the up and down, charm and strange, and top and bottom quarks. All particles that are made of quarks are called "Hadrons." Particles made of two quarks are called "Mesons," while particles made of three are called "Baryons." The Standard Model holds that there are no other combinations of quarks, and no quarks have ever been produced that are not in a pair or triplet. Murray Gell-Mann was the man to label the quark, and he got it from the book "Finnegan's Wake" by James Joyce. The line "three quarks for Muster Mark..." appears in the book. Gell-Mann won the 1969 Nobel Prize for his work in classifying elementary particles. Up and down quarks are the most common types, for they make up protons and neutrons - the bulk constituents of atoms. Hadrons Even though hadrons are technically a sub-category of fermions, for hadrons are combinations of quarks, they are such a large category that they are listed seperately here. As previously stated, hadrons are particles that are made of combinations of quarks. Quarks are never found singly, and no quark has ever been able to be isolated experimentally to date. Theoretically, it is actually impossible to isolate a quark due to quantum chromodynamics. The color force of chromodynamics is extremely strong at the level of quarks, and actually increases its strength with distance. Therefore, if you were to put enough energy into a quark system to try to pry it apart, the energy needed to separate them would be much greater than that needed to create new quarks. So, theoretically, new mesons would be created, and that is what is observed. Besides there being no paticles made of one quark, there are no particles made with more than three. Particles made of two quarks are actually made of a quark and an antiquark. They are called "Mesons." Particles that are made of three quarks are called "Baryons." Mesons Mesons are made from combinations of a quark and an anit-quark. Out of place in the hierarchy that this page sets up, mesons are not actually fermions, but are classified as bosons (even though they are made of quarks and quarks are fermions). There are about 140 types of mesons. They have a spin of 0 or integers. The following is a table of some of the main mesons:
*These mesons are made of symetric and antisymmetric combinations of ds and ds quarks. The pion is the lightest of all the mesons, and because mesons are the mediating particle of the Residual Strong Nuclear Force, they can be used to predict the maximum range of the strong interaction. The pion also shows that the masses of mesons (and hadrons) in general depend on the internal dynamics of the particle rather than the quarks within it because of the pion masses. Composed of u, d, u, and d quarks, one would expect them to have a mass of approximately 2/3 that of a proton, but they actually have masses of about 1/6. The main role of the pion is interaction with nuclei and transformation of a neutron to a proton or vice versa: The J/Ψ meson's discovery in 1974 came as a surprize to experimentors, and was the first direct experimental evidence for the fourth type of quark, the charm quark. The Υ meson's discovery at Fermilab in 1977 also did not fit into the then-standard framework. It was the first experimental evidence for the fifth type of quark, the bottom quark. Baryons Baryons are combinations of three quarks and / or antiquarks. They are categorized as hadrons and also as fermions. They have a charge and spin of integer multiples of 1/2, and they also have a baryon number of 1 and are assigned a strangeness number based on the number of s or s quarks that they are made of. Conservation of baryon number is an important part of reactions, and no known process can violate it. The following table lists some of th 120 baryons that are in the Standard Model:
Because baryons decay by the Strong Force, they typically should have decay rates on a time scale of 10-23. However, many of the baryons listed are stable for much longer periods of time; this is because there is some conservation law that forbids their decay by the Strong Force, and so they decay via the Weak. Atomic Physics This section is designed to give a brief overview of what is involved in atoms and the sizes involved. Normal atoms (e.g. not atoms) are approximately on the scale of 1 Å across, including the electron cloud. Protons and neutrons occupy a nucleus region that is on the scale of 0.1 mÅ, while electrons orbit in clouds whose shape and size are determined by the laws of quantum mechanics. Atoms are generally classified by the number of protons in the nucleus. The Periodic Chart is a graphical classification system for categorizing atoms. Naturally existing atoms have a proton content of up to and including 92; laboratories have succeeded in creating atoms up to 116 protons, although they are very short-lived. An important fact in nuclear physics is that fission or fusion results in a release of energy if the by-product(s) approach Iron (Fe) in terms of their atomic number. The reaction consumes energy if the by-product(s) go away from Fe. Antimatter Most scientists will admit that much of theoretical work is as much subject to aesthetics as it is to science. What this means is that while they seek to explain structure and observations, they are guided by the goal of explaining it in a manner that makes sence and "looks good." One important part of this is symmetry. To this effect, the Standard Model predicts that everything has an exact opposite, or anitparticle. Antiparticles have the exact same mass but the opposite, charge, spin, and other quantum numbers. They are usually represented by a bar over the symbol for the matter counterpart, such as u and u, although they are sometimes represented by the opposite superscript charge, such as e- and e+ for the electron and its antiparticle the positron.
|
Easy...
A) 'Fermi' = Fermi Lab in Batavia, IL.B) 'Tevatron' = The name of the 'atom smasher' at Fermi Lab. Thus fas the largest in the world, has a 4 mile circumference, and is built underground.
C) 'CERN' = French name for 'European Organization for Nuclear Research'. It is in Switzerland near Geneva.
D) 'LHC' = 'Large Hadron Collider' being built at 'CERN' and when fully online will be the largest (most powerful) 'atom smasher' in the world with a 17 mile circumference, surpassing the 'Tevatron' at Fermi Lab.
Fermi Lab is a very cool place to visit. And on the property the have Bison roaming in the fields. You can drive around almost the whole facility. But the Visitor Center Tower is where you start and tou can see the 'Tevatron ring' outline on th eground.
I didn't know Fermi Lab would close when the LHC comes fully online, that'll suck big time.
Thanks for contributing some light to this (potentially) interesting thread.
Glad I could help. :)
But matter contains mass by definition. That’s like saying that there must be some particle that gives liquid its liquidity.
Right, but how do we know that a given chunk of matter has mass? It resists being moved when force is applied to it, and it exerts a gravitational pull.
But why does it resist being moved, and why does it exert a gravitational pull?
Whoa! Laz! I’m impressed!
You note the resting mass of Xi = 1.315. More accurately, I believe it is 1.316.
That right THERE speaks for itself. No Trevatron for moi.
To expound on this a little bit....
One of the great questions involves two aspects of mass.
First, there’s inertial mass: The tendency of an object’s motion to remain unvarying (including remaining at rest) except as acted on by external forces. This is elaborated in Newton’s first two Laws of Motion.
Second, there’s gravitational mass: The attraction between any two objects proportional to the product of their masses. This is elaborated in Newton’s Law of Universal Gravitation.
So the question is, why are these two properties apparently inseparable? Why is a body’s inertial mass, for instance, exactly proportional to its weight (its attraction to a nearby large object such as the Earth)?
Think of all the implications if physicists could discover, or create, a discrepancy between the two! Your aircraft carrier suspended from a helium balloon is an example.
If a tree falls in the forest and there is no one there; does it make a sound?
The other is, the oft quoted Biblical. . ....and the Word was made flesh.
As well, a popular zen koan comes to mind: what is sound of one hand clapping?/sigh (a breath-less sigh).
Oh. . .and then there is Shrodinger's Cat. . .and a gazillion more perhaps; but brings the quantum challenges/dilemmas into focus. . .maybe?
I never was much interested in this stuff before, but once I found out from quantum physics a particle could be two places at once that sold me! It's quite fascinating. It's almost as if we truly are living in an illusion.
They will eventually discover that they cannot discover what they cannot comprehend.
Then they will understand.
We *ALL* start by making that mistake.
When you get more experience, you will see that it is 1.315. Everyone KNOWS that it is 1.1315. Movie stars have mentioned this, in Public Service Announcements about the resting mass of Xi.
In fact, I am starting a lobbying group: The National Association For The Definition Of The Resting Mass of Xi Being 1.315, or NAFTDOTRM1.1315 for short.
We will be a 501(c)(3).
Had Bubba Clinton not hated the Super Conducting Super-Collider so much that he had it destroyed before it was finished, we might have discovered the Higgs Boson years ago.
I’m just sayin’.
The best thing that could happen would be to take those oil wells off line. We have plenty of domestic energy available, but the problem is the expense related to obtaining it versus just pumping like they do in the Middle East.
The thing the Greenies don’t understand is, if you pay more than your global competitor for energy, you eventually can no longer compete. If we are all paying more, then that does not become an issue. This is why all the subsidized renewable forms of energy (solar, wind etc) are a dead end until the cost for easy to obtain energy goes up.
If our economy needs cheap middle eastern oil to continue to thrive, then we have a problem. The situation is not sustainable. Combine that with the ineptitude demonstrated by one of the major oil companies in the Gulf (basically not only severely damaging an important econmy but also making continued drilling of that oil less feasible), then I am not sure where we go from here.
Good point. When this particle is found and identified, I assume there will be a mystery just as mysterious as to why the particle acts the way it does in order to “cause” mass?
And the screwball ideas and terrorism it is funding is also a BIG part of the equation. Without oil income, radicalism in that part of the world would be broke! Right now we have little choice but to fight it with troops and guns. Starving it's money supply would be better.
I have no problem with increasing knowledge of particles, etc. especially if it leads to practical benefits. I do have a problem, however, with the assumption that the underlying particles and energy are somehow more “real” than our common sense experience. For instance, something cannot be both a particle and not a particle ... this violates the law of noncontradiction which is the very basis of our logic ... which is, incidentally the very logic that we use when we analyze something using the scientific method.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.