CERN experiment discovers five new particles
1–10 of 127 posts
Re: CERN experiment discovers five new particles
#2I assume these particles were already predicted as part of the Standard Model?
Re: CERN experiment discovers five new particles
#3I assume these particles were already predicted as part of the Standard Model?
yes, and note that these are not fundamental particles (like the Higgs was for example), but composite particles of yet another combination of the fundamental quarks. The SM predicts the existence of hundreds (thousands?) of these.
Re: CERN experiment discovers five new particles
#4I assume these particles were already predicted as part of the Standard Model?
Professor Tim Gershon, Professor of Physics at University of Warwick and UK spokesperson for the LHCb experiment:
“After the LHCb experiment is upgraded in the next long shutdown of the LHC (during 2019-20), it will be able to move to the next stage in the search for new particles: namely, doubly heavy baryons. These states – which contain two charm quarks or two beauty quarks or one of each – have long been predicted, but never yet observed. Their discovery will help to address important unsolved questions about how hadrons are bound together by the strong interaction.”
So I would assume that yes they have been predicted and is opening the doors for further confirmations?
Re: CERN experiment discovers five new particles
#5I assume these particles were already predicted as part of the Standard Model?
Professor Tim Gershon, Professor of Physics at University of Warwick and UK spokesperson for the LHCb experiment: “After the LHCb experiment is upgraded in the next long shutdown of the LHC (during 2019-20), it will be able to move to the next stage in the search for new particles: namely, doubly heavy baryons. These states – which contain two charm quarks or two beauty quarks or one of each – have long been predicte…
> Their discovery will help to address important unsolved questions about how hadrons are bound together by the strong interaction.
If the particles were already predicted by the standard model, what kind of unsolved questions are to address here, besides validating the predictions of the standard model even further? (serious question)
Re: CERN experiment discovers five new particles
#6I assume these particles were already predicted as part of the Standard Model?
Professor Tim Gershon, Professor of Physics at University of Warwick and UK spokesperson for the LHCb experiment: “After the LHCb experiment is upgraded in the next long shutdown of the LHC (during 2019-20), it will be able to move to the next stage in the search for new particles: namely, doubly heavy baryons. These states – which contain two charm quarks or two beauty quarks or one of each – have long been predicte…
Please take more care in quoting. What you've quoted does not describe the current work, but rather something they haven't demonstrated yet called "doubly heavy baryons". That sentence was immediately preceded by this one:
Professor Tim Gershon, Professor of Physics at University of Warwick and UK spokesperson for the LHCb experiment, explained what will come next for the LHCb experiment: “After the LHCb experiment is upgraded in the next long shutdown of the LHC (during 2019-20), it will be able to move to the next stage in the search for new particles: namely, doubly heavy baryons.
Re: CERN experiment discovers five new particles
#7Earlier quoted context omitted.
Professor Tim Gershon, Professor of Physics at University of Warwick and UK spokesperson for the LHCb experiment: “After the LHCb experiment is upgraded in the next long shutdown of the LHC (during 2019-20), it will be able to move to the next stage in the search for new particles: namely, doubly heavy baryons. These states – which contain two charm quarks or two beauty quarks or one of each – have long been predicte…
> Their discovery will help to address important unsolved questions about how hadrons are bound together by the strong interaction. If the particles were already predicted by the standard model, what kind of unsolved questions are to address here, besides validating the predictions of the standard model even further? (serious question)
Because a prediction is just an assumption (theory), and it can become a house of cards when basing future science on that assumption. Observation is proof, so future science can use that proof without worry.
Re: CERN experiment discovers five new particles
#8Earlier quoted context omitted.
Professor Tim Gershon, Professor of Physics at University of Warwick and UK spokesperson for the LHCb experiment: “After the LHCb experiment is upgraded in the next long shutdown of the LHC (during 2019-20), it will be able to move to the next stage in the search for new particles: namely, doubly heavy baryons. These states – which contain two charm quarks or two beauty quarks or one of each – have long been predicte…
Please take more care in quoting. What you've quoted does not describe the current work, but rather something they haven't demonstrated yet called "doubly heavy baryons". That sentence was immediately preceded by this one: Professor Tim Gershon, Professor of Physics at University of Warwick and UK spokesperson for the LHCb experiment, explained what will come next for the LHCb experiment: “After the LHCb experiment i…
Yes, you are right, I miss read those paragraphs...
Re: CERN experiment discovers five new particles
#9I assume these particles were already predicted as part of the Standard Model?
AFAIK, the experimentally determined rest masses of these excited states/particles (same thing, different was of looking at it) agree with the calculated ones well. So yes, they were predicted. No surprises sadly; of course it's still a huge achievement!
Re: CERN experiment discovers five new particles
#10Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Their discovery will help to address important unsolved questions about how hadrons are bound together by the strong interaction. If the particles were already predicted by the standard model, what kind of unsolved questions are to address here, besides validating the predictions of the standard model even further? (serious question)
Because a prediction is just an assumption (theory), and it can become a house of cards when basing future science on that assumption. Observation is proof, so future science can use that proof without worry.
Can you clarify? In my mind
"prediction" != "assumption" != "theory" "observation" != "proof"