• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Update on the search for the Higgs boson at CERN

Status
Not open for further replies.

CiSTM

Banned
Geneva, 22 June 2012.

Dear Journalists,

CERN will hold a scientific seminar at 9:00 CEST on 4 July to deliver the latest update in the search for the Higgs boson. At this seminar, coming on the eve of the year’s major particle physics conference, ICHEP, in Melbourne, the ATLAS and CMS experiments will deliver the preliminary results of their 2012 data analysis.

The seminar begins at 9:00 CEST. The auditorium in which the seminar will be held is reserved for CERN personnel and researchers from the laboratory’s user community, but a video stream will be relayed to another auditorium.

A press conference will follow the seminar in presence of CERN Director General, Rolf Heuer, ATLAS spokesperson, Fabiola Gianotti and CMS spokesperson, Joe Incandela.

Media wishing to attend the press conference on CERN site should fill in the registration form.
Both the seminar and the following Q&A will be webcast.

Webcast DOES NOT need registration. Journalists following the webcast may submit questions through Twitter using the hashtag #ICHEP2012.
You can watch the webcast here when it airs http://webcast.web.cern.ch/webcast/


edit. Guardian articele
As soon as scientists at Cern revealed that they would host a seminar on 4 July to announce the latest results from its two main Large Hadron Collider (LHC) experiments, Atlas and CMS, physicists and bloggers started guessing. Would they announce the long-awaited discovery of the Higgs boson, a find that would be sure to trigger a raft of Nobel prizes and launch a new era of physics?

In December last year, Cern scientists glimpsed something that looked like it might be a Higgs boson in their data, but the results were not conclusive enough to be formally called a discovery. But now hopes are high.

"We now have more than double the data we had last year," said Sergio Bertolucci, Cern's director for research and computing. "That should be enough to see whether the trends we were seeing in the 2011 data are still there, or whether they've gone away. It's a very exciting time."

Even if the scientists next week report the signal for a new type of particle, it will take time to convince the scientific community that it is indeed the Higgs boson, or whether it is something else, perhaps something even more exotic that opens the door to new theories of physics.

"It's a bit like spotting a familiar face from afar," said Rolf Heuer, Cern's director general. "Sometimes you need closer inspection to find out whether it's really your best friend, or actually your best friend's twin."

The Higgs boson is a subatomic particle that was predicted to exist nearly 50 years ago. Its discovery would prove there is an invisible energy field that fills the vacuum throughout the observable universe. Without the field, or something like it, we would not be here.

According to theory, the Higgs field switched on a trillionth of a second after the big bang blasted the universe into existence. Before this moment, all of the particles in the cosmos were massless and zipped around chaotically at the speed of light.

When the Higgs field switched on, some particles began to feel a "drag" as they moved around, as though caught in cosmic glue. By clinging to the particles, the field gave them mass, making them move around more slowly. This was a crucial moment in the formation of the universe, because it allowed particles to come together and form all the atoms and molecules around today.

But the Higgs field is selective. Particles of light, or photons, move through the Higgs field as if it wasn't there. Because the field does not cling to them, they remain weightless and destined to move around at the speed of light forever. Other particles, like quarks and electrons – the smallest constituents of atoms – get caught in the field and gain mass in the process.

The field has enormous implications. Without it, the smallest building blocks of matter, from which all else is made, would forever rush around at the speed of light. They would never come together to make stars, planets, or life as we know it.

To find evidence for the Higgs boson, scientists have to scour data from hundreds of trillions of proton collisions inside the Large Hadron Collider at Cern. If the Higgs were created at the collider, it would immediately decay into more familiar subatomic particles such as photons and quarks (the building blocks of protons and neutrons). Scientists look for specific excesses (or "bumps") of these particles in the detritus of the collisions, which are the "fingerprint" of the Higgs boson.

When they calculate whether a particular bump in the data is significant, particle physicists use a five-point "sigma" scale. One sigma means that the results are not too far from being random statistical fluctuations in the data. A three-sigma result counts as an observation, but only a full, five-sigma result means that scientists can count it as an official discovery. This means that there is less than a one-in-a-million chance of the result being a statistical fluke.

In December last year, the Atlas experiment at Cern reported a 2.9 sigma bump in its data that could be a Higgs boson weighing 126 gigaelectronvolts (GeV) – 126 times heavier than a proton and around 500,000 times heavier than an electron – while the CMS team reported a 3.1 sigma Higgs signal at a mass of around 124GeV.

Ahead of next week's announcements, on the Not Even Wrong blog, physicist Peter Woit has assembled the scientific rumours so far about what Cern might be in a position to announce, including an assessment of how much data Cern scientists may have ploughed through since the Large Hadron Collider paused its collisions on 18 June. He said there could also be a mini-spoiler from the LHC's rivals in the United States. "On Monday at 9am Fermilab will try and steal a little bit of the LHC's thunder by announcing some new evidence for the Higgs from the Tevatron data," wrote Woit. "This uses the channel of a Higgs produced with a W or Z [bosons that carry the weak nuclear force], the Higgs then decaying to pairs of b-quarks."

What happens next? Well, unless rumours intensify over the weekend or someone lets slip the results, the best advice for Higgs watchers would be to keep some champagne on ice for Wednesday.
 

Metal-Geo

Member
Probably haven't found it yet, they will probably detect it during this years hunt.
They'd better hurry. I feel like we're being laughed at from across the galaxy.

5QUjL.jpg
 

CiSTM

Banned
From Peter Woit's blog

Higgs Update

Posted on June 28, 2012 by woit


The Higgs discovery announcement will be at 9am next Wednesday. This is close enough that I can’t reasonably be accused of “subverting the scientific process” and ruining the LHC Higgs analyses by reporting the results here. Unfortunately, no source has provided me with these results yet, so that won’t happen anyway, at least not right now. However, I have learned the following, which may be of interest:
■On Monday at 9am Fermilab will try and steal a little bit of the LHC’s thunder by announcing some new evidence for the Higgs from the Tevatron data. This uses the channel of a Higgs produced with a W or Z, the Higgs then decaying to pairs of b-quarks. This is a channel where the Tevatron is sensitive to a Higgs signal, but the LHC isn’t (at the higher LHC energies backgrounds are too large).
■ATLAS and CMS each collected about 6 inverse femtobarns of data before the technical stop on June 18th, and they are rushing to get as much of it analyzed as possible. They are concentrating on the two most sensitive channels: H->gamma+gamma and H->ZZ->4l and are likely to have over 5 inverse femtobarns of 2012 8 TeV data analyzed in these two channels to present at ICHEP.
■There may not be any 2012 Higgs data from other channels presented at ICHEP. ATLAS will have a H->WW->lvlv analysis, but likely not ready for public release.
■To get the statistical significance necessary to claim a Higgs discovery, the experiments will be producing a combination of their best analysis of the 2011 data in all channels and the 2012 data in the H->gamma+gamma and H->ZZ->4l channels.
■There will be no CERN combination of ATLAS and CMS results publicly released. This is not because such a thing is hard to do (and I believe it is actually being done, just not released), but because of political reasons. I don’t much understand these, but this blog entry gives some of the kind of reasoning being used.
■With no CERN combination, attention will focus on Philip Gibbs at viXra log who in the past has produced reliable unofficial combinations of data, and is likely to do so again.
■With the discovery a done deal, the attention of physicists will focus on the question of whether the signal being seen is compatible with SM predictions, or whether this new particle has unexpected properties. Here the main two numbers to look for are the ATLAS + CMS signal size in each of the two most sensitive channels. To get these, you can do your own combination of the separate ATLAS and CMS numbers, or wait for Philip. The signal size is a product of the Higgs production cross-section and the branching ratio for the channel. I’ve seen estimates of the reliability of the SM prediction of the cross-section varying from 15% to 25% (see more here). The branching ratios are much more accurately known.
■Probably nothing new about SUSY at ICHEP. New SUSY analyses are being targeted for the SUSY2012 conference in August.

Update: Resonaances has more here, including the news that CMS will report 2012 data about the H->WW->lvlv channel (about the significance of this, see viXra log), and possibly others. Whether the 5 sigma significance level will be reached by a single experiment remains unclear…

Update: Finally confirmation from a reliable media outlet… The Daily Mail reports God particle is ‘found’. One evidence for this is that supposedly “Five leading theoretical physicists have been invited to the event on Wednesday”. This may mean Englert, Higgs, Guralnik, Kibble and Hagen, with Anderson getting dissed as usual.

Keep your eyes on science20.com's Tommaso Dorigo. He usually tells some inside stuff before the press.
 

Yen

Member
The "God Particle" moniker should never be used.

How exactly is CERN funded? Because if their funding was to be pulled, could they not say, "a ha, we are getting very, very close"?
 

Timedog

good credit (by proxy)
"Girl, I'll make you see the Higgs-Boson particle, ushering in a new era of Physics."

"My swag contains 6 inverse femtobarns of data. I won't tell your boyfriend if you don't."
 

GaimeGuy

Volunteer Deputy Campaign Director, Obama for America '16
The "God Particle" moniker should never be used.

How exactly is CERN funded? Because if their funding was to be pulled, could they not say, "a ha, we are getting very, very close"?

It's an international organization funded by its member states (of which there are currently 20, with many others, such as Romania, Serbia, Israel, Turkey, Cyprus, and Slovenia, scheduled to either become members or decide on becoming members in the next 1-3 years.). There are dozens of non-member states that are also involved in programs at CERN.

Think of it as an international physics lab.
 

Timedog

good credit (by proxy)
If they find it, how will it be useful, and on what timescale? Will technology get a lot cooler? Will it tell them more about how the universe came about and how it came to be like it is?
 

CiSTM

Banned
If they find it, how will it be useful, and on what timescale? Will technology get a lot cooler? Will it tell them more about how the universe came about and how it came to be like it is?

It really doesn't change much. Higgs finding would support the physics standard model. Higgs was predicted in the 60s but we just haven't been able to prove it exsist. Not finding the particle would actually be more surprising.
 

nubbe

Member
The "God Particle" moniker should never be used.

How exactly is CERN funded? Because if their funding was to be pulled, could they not say, "a ha, we are getting very, very close"?

It is funded by the free people of the united sates of Europe
 

AAequal

Banned
From Peter Woit's blog

Higgs Update

Posted on June 28, 2012 by woit


The Higgs discovery announcement will be at 9am next Wednesday. This is close enough that I can’t reasonably be accused of “subverting the scientific process” and ruining the LHC Higgs analyses by reporting the results here. Unfortunately, no source has provided me with these results yet, so that won’t happen anyway, at least not right now. However, I have learned the following, which may be of interest:
■On Monday at 9am Fermilab will try and steal a little bit of the LHC’s thunder by announcing some new evidence for the Higgs from the Tevatron data. This uses the channel of a Higgs produced with a W or Z, the Higgs then decaying to pairs of b-quarks. This is a channel where the Tevatron is sensitive to a Higgs signal, but the LHC isn’t (at the higher LHC energies backgrounds are too large).
■ATLAS and CMS each collected about 6 inverse femtobarns of data before the technical stop on June 18th, and they are rushing to get as much of it analyzed as possible. They are concentrating on the two most sensitive channels: H->gamma+gamma and H->ZZ->4l and are likely to have over 5 inverse femtobarns of 2012 8 TeV data analyzed in these two channels to present at ICHEP.
■There may not be any 2012 Higgs data from other channels presented at ICHEP. ATLAS will have a H->WW->lvlv analysis, but likely not ready for public release.
■To get the statistical significance necessary to claim a Higgs discovery, the experiments will be producing a combination of their best analysis of the 2011 data in all channels and the 2012 data in the H->gamma+gamma and H->ZZ->4l channels.
■There will be no CERN combination of ATLAS and CMS results publicly released. This is not because such a thing is hard to do (and I believe it is actually being done, just not released), but because of political reasons. I don’t much understand these, but this blog entry gives some of the kind of reasoning being used.
■With no CERN combination, attention will focus on Philip Gibbs at viXra log who in the past has produced reliable unofficial combinations of data, and is likely to do so again.
■With the discovery a done deal, the attention of physicists will focus on the question of whether the signal being seen is compatible with SM predictions, or whether this new particle has unexpected properties. Here the main two numbers to look for are the ATLAS + CMS signal size in each of the two most sensitive channels. To get these, you can do your own combination of the separate ATLAS and CMS numbers, or wait for Philip. The signal size is a product of the Higgs production cross-section and the branching ratio for the channel. I’ve seen estimates of the reliability of the SM prediction of the cross-section varying from 15% to 25% (see more here). The branching ratios are much more accurately known.
■Probably nothing new about SUSY at ICHEP. New SUSY analyses are being targeted for the SUSY2012 conference in August.

Update: Resonaances has more here, including the news that CMS will report 2012 data about the H->WW->lvlv channel (about the significance of this, see viXra log), and possibly others. Whether the 5 sigma significance level will be reached by a single experiment remains unclear…

Update: Finally confirmation from a reliable media outlet… The Daily Mail reports God particle is ‘found’. One evidence for this is that supposedly “Five leading theoretical physicists have been invited to the event on Wednesday”. This may mean Englert, Higgs, Guralnik, Kibble and Hagen, with Anderson getting dissed as usual.

Keep your eyes on science20.com's Tommaso Dorigo. He usually tells some inside stuff before the press.
Seems like Woit was right at least about the bolded part :O
A 2.5 Sigma Higgs Signal From The Tevatron !
 

DonasaurusRex

Online Ho Champ
"Dear Everyone,

We still haven't found it!"

hahahaa, well thats possible, but even if they dont find it, or find out it doesnt exist , that moves the understanding forward. Right now our standard model for particles needs to be expanded anyway.
 

CiSTM

Banned
From Peter Woit's blog

Update: As pointed out in a comment, Matthew Chalmers at Nature has
The ATLAS and CMS experiments are each seeing signals between 4.5 and 5 sigma, just a whisker away from a solid discovery claim.


Update: Curiouser and curiouser. I’m hearing that per-experiment combinations are around 5 sigma or above. Very unclear why the AP report is indicating no completely conclusive discovery announcement. Maybe the CERN administration is playing a game with us, downplaying expectations…
 

Log4Girlz

Member
If they find it, how will it be useful, and on what timescale? Will technology get a lot cooler? Will it tell them more about how the universe came about and how it came to be like it is?

God, I wish discovering the Higgs and its nature would someday allow us to eliminate the mass of particles. Imagine super cheap space travel etc sigh.
 
yes, the media really hypes it up to be "super important", but, it's only important to Scientists.

Oh, don't get me wrong, I think it's important. I myself an interested in it. But I think that theory sounds stupid, so I'd prefer they confirmed that it doesn't exist.

Mind you, I really don't know the details about it, so I'm in no real place to say it sounds stupid. It's just a gut feeling.
 

raphier

Banned
The "God Particle" moniker should never be used.
I believe the name comes from the idea that in order for Jesus to walk on water He needs to manipulate His mass for the water to carry. This is closely what Higg's does for quarks.
 

stufte

Member
This better not be like that time the news went apeshit over an invention touted as "something that will revolutionize the way we live" and all we got was a fucking segway. I WANTED TELEPORTERS, DAMNIT!!
 
I believe the name comes from the idea that in order for Jesus to walk on water He needs to manipulate His mass for the water to carry. This is closely what Higg's does for quarks.

"Lederman said he gave it the nickname "The God Particle" because the particle is "so central to the state of physics today, so crucial to our understanding of the structure of matter, yet so elusive,""
 

KHarvey16

Member
Oh, don't get me wrong, I think it's important. I myself an interested in it. But I think that theory sounds stupid, so I'd prefer they confirmed that it doesn't exist.

Mind you, I really don't know the details about it, so I'm in no real place to say it sounds stupid. It's just a gut feeling.

What's stupid about the standard model?
 

raphier

Banned
"Lederman said he gave it the nickname "The God Particle" because the particle is "so central to the state of physics today, so crucial to our understanding of the structure of matter, yet so elusive,""
Well that too, but then again I like it to refer to jesus, the creationists swallow it like a butter. And it's cool.
 

Amir0x

Banned
I'm so happy it's on July 4, so I have off from work and can tune in (and probably not understand half of the jargon)

Can't wait
 

KHarvey16

Member
Sorry, I just think, on a superficial level, that the idea that there's a boson that provides mass is stupid. I haven't studied the standart model to to really have a point.

The boson itself does not provide the mass. The field that produces the boson is what provides the mass.
 

Chichikov

Member
haha, why?
Well, finding the Higgs will just reconfirm what we know, and most likely won't open any new avenues for research or technology.
Plus a lot of people hoping that a new model will allow for more science fictions things to be possible, but honestly, that's a bit of wishful thinking.

Mind you, this is not my position, in my mind the search for truth has to take precedence to everything in science, I'm just presenting the counter points.
 

XMonkey

lacks enthusiasm.
Well, finding the Higgs will just reconfirm what we know, and most likely won't open any new avenues for research or technology.
Plus a lot of people hoping that a new model will allow for more science fictions things to be possible, but honestly, that's a bit of wishful thinking.

Mind you, this is not my position, in my mind the search for truth has to take precedence to everything in science, I'm just presenting the counter points.
Not entirely true in regards to the first part... from Cosmic Variance:

Preliminary thought #1: There is a “nightmare scenario” that particle physicists have worried about for years. Namely: find exactly the Standard Model Higgs and nothing else at the LHC. I personally assign the nightmare scenario very low probability. Not on the basis of any inside info, just on the basis of physics. We know the Standard Model is not right; there is dark matter, there is dark energy, there is baryogenesis, there are the hierarchy and cosmological constant and strong-CP problems. It can’t be the final answer. Seems to me much more likely that there is interesting physics at the weak scale above and beyond the Higgs, than we just get stuck with a vanilla Standard Model. Beyond this physics-informed prediction, there is the wishful hope that the Higgs itself leads directly to new physics. Most obvious example: in many (most?) models of dark matter as weakly-interacting massive particles, the dominant way that dark matter and ordinary matter interact is through exchange of Higgs bosons. If that’s how nature works, the Higgs is literally a portal from our world to another. This isn’t the end of the show, it’s merely an act break (as we say in the movie biz).
 
The boson itself does not provide the mass. The field that produces the boson is what provides the mass.

Now that sounds interesting enough to make me research it. I wish the newspapers wouldn't botch the news like that, but I know it's my fault for not knowing.

Thanks.
 

Chichikov

Member
Not entirely true in regards to the first part... from Cosmic Variance:
Oh, I never bought that doom and gloom stuff, but imagine if the standard model get disproved (whatever that even mean), imagine how much money and noble prize opportunities will flow into the field.
Again, I don't think that's a consideration scientists get to have, you have one goal, and that's to find the truth, just saying.
 
Oh, I never bought that doom and gloom stuff, but imagine if the standard model get disproved (whatever that even mean), imagine how much money and noble prize opportunities will flow into the field.
Again, I don't think that's a consideration scientists get to have, you have one goal, and that's to find the truth, just saying.

Saying that it's wrong isn't doom and gloom, because it is incomplete. There's a lot of stuff it doesn't include and cannot explain in its current form. Some people believe we're on the brink of a conceptual shift in theoretical physics, the magnitude of which we haven't seen since the inception of relativity and QM 100 years ago. Physicists don't really like to take all their hard work and throw it into a bin, so we'll keep patching up and modifying the Standard Model until something breaks it entirely.
 

Ether_Snake

安安安安安安安安安安安安安安安
It's an international organization funded by its member states (of which there are currently 20, with many others, such as Romania, Serbia, Israel, Turkey, Cyprus, and Slovenia, scheduled to either become members or decide on becoming members in the next 1-3 years.). There are dozens of non-member states that are also involved in programs at CERN.

Think of it as an international physics lab.

We should have more such international ventures:(
 

Chichikov

Member
Saying that it's wrong isn't doom and gloom, because it is incomplete. There's a lot of stuff it doesn't include and cannot explain in its current form. Some people believe we're on the brink of a conceptual shift in theoretical physics, the magnitude of which we haven't seen since the inception of relativity and QM 100 years ago. Physicists don't really like to take all their hard work and throw it into a bin, so we'll keep patching up and modifying the Standard Model until something breaks it entirely.
But they didn't really patch the standard model though, not since the 70s.
And man, a discovery of the Higgs boson is probably going to be a great victory for the standard model (though we really don't know yet for sure).

Also, there were HUGE strides in theoretical physics in the last century.
Bohr model was published 99 years ago, we've come a long way baby.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom