TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

Supersymmetry theory in doubt. Researchers detect rare particle decay at LHC.

80 点作者 pepsi_can超过 12 年前

10 条评论

Steuard超过 12 年前
This article conflates all sorts of loosely connected ideas and buzzwords without really giving a solid explanation of any of them (least of all this new result). A more focused look at this particular (but quite preliminary) result can be found at<p><a href="http://www.science20.com/quantum_diaries_survivor/lhcb_evidence_rare_decay_bs_dimuons-96311" rel="nofollow">http://www.science20.com/quantum_diaries_survivor/lhcb_evide...</a><p>From the sound of it, many of the details won't become available until a seminar tomorrow. (Nevertheless, it sounds like this really will constrain many forms of "new physics" by quite a bit.)
InclinedPlane超过 12 年前
I would just like to take a moment here to draw attention to the fact that the planned Superconducting Supercollider would have been even more capable at probing supersymmetry than the LHC and had it not been cancelled it would have been operating for well over a decade by now.
评论 #4774427 未加载
评论 #4775128 未加载
ISL超过 12 年前
Useful links here:<p><a href="http://profmattstrassler.com/2012/11/12/first-news-from-kyoto-conference/" rel="nofollow">http://profmattstrassler.com/2012/11/12/first-news-from-kyot...</a><p><a href="http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=5264" rel="nofollow">http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=5264</a><p>Talk is here (follow password instructions): <a href="http://kds.kek.jp/getFile.py/access?contribId=61&#38;sessionId=25&#38;resId=0&#38;materialId=slides&#38;confId=9237" rel="nofollow">http://kds.kek.jp/getFile.py/access?contribId=61&#38;session...</a>
评论 #4774303 未加载
评论 #4775089 未加载
mercuryrising超过 12 年前
Humans are running in a relay marathon of knowledge. Physics always seems to stagnate, then jump. The jumps come when a bunch of smart people can collocate and communicate. That's the recipe, and that's the only recipe. It's hard to share the energy in the room when you are not in the same room.<p>The cause of the jump though is not a bunch of people getting together, it's someone crazy enough to throw the first stone. It's someone crazy enough to question the structure science has created. It's someone daring enough to break it all apart, for the benefit of humanity, to let us rebuild and get closer to the correct path. One person starts a revolution. All the smart people look at all the pieces that broke and see how they can fit together in a new way.<p>I can't see this happening in 'new physics'. Yes, they are doing amazing things, things no one has ever been daring enough to do before. But quite frankly, they aren't diverse enough to solve their own problems they created. It's incredibly hard to solve the problems you made. There are no analogies to the problems physics is asking as of yet. To get analogies, you have to have people wander into your problem and say 'Hey! I was doing something like that for my Neuroscience research yesterday, maybe there's a connection!'. We aren't going to get that though, Physics has gone too far down the hole to relate to other fields. Unless they do what they always do, and just make new ones.
评论 #4776597 未加载
评论 #4774562 未加载
pepsi_can超过 12 年前
There is an interesting discussion about this on Reddit:<p><a href="http://www.reddit.com/r/science/comments/13293t/supersymmetry_theory_dealt_a_blow_researchers_at/" rel="nofollow">http://www.reddit.com/r/science/comments/13293t/supersymmetr...</a>
andrewcooke超过 12 年前
can anyone confirm my understanding of the basic physics here?<p>they are observing a transition from one particle to another that involves a process whose probability depends on "all particles" in some weird sense, because it includes particle-antiparticle pairs (so is affected by vacuum fluctuations?).<p>because of this, they have a weird situation where an experimental result depends on all possible particles (below some energy cutoff i guess).<p>and that is why it's a good test for standard model v super-symmetry. because super-symmetry (to be symmetric) predicts a bunch more particles. and if those are real, we would see something different.<p>i am not sure where i got this from, but it seemed to be implied by one of the links here...
评论 #4774292 未加载
jasondavies超过 12 年前
The "doubt" seems to have been refuted here:<p><a href="http://motls.blogspot.cz/2012/11/superstringy-compactifications.html" rel="nofollow">http://motls.blogspot.cz/2012/11/superstringy-compactificati...</a>
wheelerwj超过 12 年前
Patience my good people. We all remember what happened the last time there was a rare particle delay...
评论 #4774030 未加载
评论 #4774242 未加载
pyrotechnick超过 12 年前
Tesla was right.
Create超过 12 年前
just for the record and to please the prospective downvoting mob, in order to warn any non-westerners:<p>"The cost [...] has been evaluated, taking into account realistic labor prices in different countries. The total cost is X (with a western equivalent value of Y) [where Y&#62;X]<p>source: LHCb calorimeters : Technical Design Report<p>ISBN: 9290831693 <a href="http://cdsweb.cern.ch/record/494264" rel="nofollow">http://cdsweb.cern.ch/record/494264</a><p><a href="http://cdsweb.cern.ch/record/1127343?ln=en" rel="nofollow">http://cdsweb.cern.ch/record/1127343?ln=en</a>
评论 #4774351 未加载