Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Did the W-boson just “break the standard model”?

backreaction.blogspot.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 282 posts

Re: Did the W-boson just “break the standard model”?

#41

Post by mannykannot »

simulate-me wrote: post #32

I feel like this was too much a diatribe on why supersymmetry is not a good solution and didn't spend enough time on evaluating what the actual implications are of this result holding.

On the one hand, it does not strike me as unreasonable to point out that experience suggests that this, too, will turn out to be an experimental or methodological error.

Nor do I think it is unreasonable to point out that this result, if correct, would not validate supersymmetry (if that is, in fact, the case.)

On the other hand, the fact that supersymmetry isn’t a theory, but a property of a class of models that can be tweaked to fit a broad range of experimental results (again, if that is, in fact, the case) does not rule out the possibility that the LHC could have found evidence that strongly supported one specific theory that happens to be supersymmetric. Hossenfelder seems to be saying that the LHC definitively ruled out what was considered to be the most plausible candidate(s), which would imply there was at least one such falsifiable theory. Allegations of incompetence or mendacity should not be made lightly, and unless the promoters of the LHC routinely said supersymmetry in general might be disproved, the allegations seem unwarranted.

Re: Did the W-boson just “break the standard model”?

#42

Post by Mo3 »

samstave wrote: post #38
Mo3 wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ahhhh, that. I only ever heard it being used in relation to imagining bad future events that turn out far better than expected.

German is an interesting tongue... Einstürzende Neubauten - the band, but the word means "a new building thats always in disrepair" (or so I was told)

Nah, it means "collapsing newly constructed buildings", lol.

Einstürzend = collapsing

Neubauten = made of "Neu"=new and "bauten"=buildings

Re: Did the W-boson just “break the standard model”?

#43

Post by lisper »

mannykannot wrote: post #41
simulate-me wrote: post #32

I feel like this was too much a diatribe on why supersymmetry is not a good solution and didn't spend enough time on evaluating what the actual implications are of this result holding.

On the one hand, it does not strike me as unreasonable to point out that experience suggests that this, too, will turn out to be an experimental or methodological error. Nor do I think it is unreasonable to point out that this result, if correct, would not validate supersymmetry (if that is, in fact, the case.) On the other hand, the fact that supersymmetry isn’t a theory, but a property of a class of models that can…

Falsifying supersymmetry is like falsifying Ptolemaic epicycles. You can never falsify it with data because epicycles can always be constructed to fit any data set [1]. Likewise, a sypersymmetric theory can be constructed to fit any set of parameters. But fitting the data is not enough. You have to fit the data with substantially fewer parameters than data points. That's the challenge.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qS4H6PEcCCA

Re: Did the W-boson just “break the standard model”?

#45

Post by robonerd »

photochemsyn wrote: post #12

Well this is kind of funny and I mostly agree so TLDR: > "I’m afraid all of this sounds rather negative. Well. There’s a reason I left particle physics. Particle physics has degenerated into a paper production enterprise that is of virtually no relevance for societal progress or for progress in any other discipline of science. The only reason we still hear so much about it is that a lot of funding goes into it and so…

> "Particle physics has degenerated into a paper production enterprise that is of virtually no relevance for societal progress [...] But the disciplines where the foundations of physics currently make progress are cosmology and astrophysics [...]"

Can anybody explain the relevance of cosmology and astrophysics to societal progress? I'm sure these are very worthwhile fields of study in other respects.. but societal progress?

Re: Did the W-boson just “break the standard model”?

#46

Post by XorNot »

photochemsyn wrote: post #28
katmannthree wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It is unfortunate that a science communicator would express her research preference in such a way. It is disappointing, and more unfortunately pretty much her personal brand now. There are, as she seems to have discovered, a lot of eyeballs to be had when you bash things that are poorly understood and already looked down upon for it. She's a fine physicist and her points have merit, but she's smart enough to be per…

There is a limited pool of resources available to do basic fundamental science and it's fair to argue that things like LHC have absorbed a disproportionate share of these scare resources, without a whole lot to show for it. Since it's the general public that ultimately funds these projects (unless the LHC can attract its own Jeff Bezos), I think it is OK to have a public discussion about it.

> LHC have absorbed a disproportionate share of these scare resources

As opposed to? This sentiment was bandied around a lot before the LHC went online, but no one ever had a proposition of what the alternative was is the goal was to advance fundamental particle physics. You've got exactly 2 ways to probe subatomic interactions: (1) particle accelerator measurement and (2) incidental measurements of high-energy spaceborne collisions.

We're doing both. Theoreticians being unable to conclusively find a new measurement is a problem independent of the fact the LHC exists to do those sorts of measurements that they'd need.

Re: Did the W-boson just “break the standard model”?

#47

Post by Mo3 »

galgalesh wrote: post #39
ethbr0 wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is soup popular in Dutch cuisine? Honestly asking. Etymologies of aphorisms (especially multiple cultural ones) fascinate me.

In Dutch-speaking Belgium, soup used to be a staple of our diet. Every meal started with soup when I was young.

Een Nederlander zegt tegen zijn vrouw: “Johanna, giet een liter water bij de soep, we hebben gasten!”

(I'm German, but I live in the Netherlands. I absolutely love these jokes between you)

Re: Did the W-boson just “break the standard model”?

#48

Post by mhh__ »

paulpauper wrote: post #44

I dunno why this blog keeps be voted to the top. Yeah, current physics research is lacking in some areas .since when was it perfect?

Because Sabine is has the bona fides to know her stuff but also a contrarian and a bit of an outcast, and she knows how to market herself. All of this combined is perfect for hackernews.

Re: Did the W-boson just “break the standard model”?

#50

Post by photochemsyn »

robonerd wrote: post #45
photochemsyn wrote: post #12

Well this is kind of funny and I mostly agree so TLDR: > "I’m afraid all of this sounds rather negative. Well. There’s a reason I left particle physics. Particle physics has degenerated into a paper production enterprise that is of virtually no relevance for societal progress or for progress in any other discipline of science. The only reason we still hear so much about it is that a lot of funding goes into it and so…

> "Particle physics has degenerated into a paper production enterprise that is of virtually no relevance for societal progress [...] But the disciplines where the foundations of physics currently make progress are cosmology and astrophysics [...]" Can anybody explain the relevance of cosmology and astrophysics to societal progress? I'm sure these are very worthwhile fields of study in other respects.. but societal pr…

Pale Blue Dot, the snapshot of Earth taken by Voyager I, comes to mind.

https://solarsystem.nasa.gov/resources/536/voyager-1s-pale-b...

The effect is more psychological than technological, but it shows the foolishness of global warfare and resource exhaustion in the name of short-term profit, and encourages people to live together peacefully and work together to solve global-scale problems.

Post reply on HN