FERMILAB Experiments Show Hints of NEW PARTICLE !!!

Originally posted by mbkennel
Indeed, they would be sweating with excitement. Though they would probably wager money on "Standard Model plus small modifications" being correct, in their heart of hearts, most physicists at LHC want the Standard Model to be wrong.

Yes, they want to find the Higgs. But it would be more interesting if they found (a) no Higgs. Or (b) two Higgs.

The Standard Model of particle physics is the most well-tested scientific theory we've ever had. Every day we conduct experiments around the globe that verify its predictions. If we're going to replace it, whatever we replace it with will have much the same content as currently, but with important differences at the fringes (i.e. quantum gravity.)

Just like when Einstein modified Newton's laws, we didn't have to throw Newton's laws out- after all, they'd already accurately predicted the movement of nearly everything in the solar system down to Jupiter's moons. General relativity added modifications that take effect at extreme scales, and explained a tiny deviation in Mercury's orbit. But we didn't throw out Newton's laws. Same will happen to the standard model, unless you think all of the predictions to date are the result of the most spectacularly coincidental error ever encountered by humanity.

Originally posted by wirehead

Originally posted by mbkennel
Indeed, they would be sweating with excitement. Though they would probably wager money on "Standard Model plus small modifications" being correct, in their heart of hearts, most physicists at LHC want the Standard Model to be wrong.

Yes, they want to find the Higgs. But it would be more interesting if they found (a) no Higgs. Or (b) two Higgs.

The Standard Model of particle physics is the most well-tested scientific theory we've ever had. Every day we conduct experiments around the globe that verify its predictions. If we're going to replace it, whatever we replace it with will have much the same content as currently, but with important differences at the fringes (i.e. quantum gravity.)

Just like when Einstein modified Newton's laws, we didn't have to throw Newton's laws out- after all, they'd already accurately predicted the movement of nearly everything in the solar system down to Jupiter's moons. General relativity added modifications that take effect at extreme scales, and explained a tiny deviation in Mercury's orbit. But we didn't throw out Newton's laws. Same will happen to the standard model, unless you think all of the predictions to date are the result of the most spectacularly coincidental error ever encountered by humanity.

Yes of course!

But as it turned out, General Relativity's internal structure and implications were profoundly different from Newtonian physics even though it reproduced Newton at low velocities.

Everybody hopes for the same with Standard Model: a new theory which subsumes the areas where the SM works well, but additionally predicts things the SM does not, and hopefully derives some of the excessively large number of arbitrary parameters.

Newton & GR have one Hand of God parameter: G. SM has many too many.

Im fuzzy here, does this rule out or make more dubious the existance of the Higgs-Bosun particle?
Does it have any bearing at all?
Anybody?Would this extra particle tend to confirm the HB or refute it? or remain indifferent?

Originally posted by stirling
Im fuzzy here, does this rule out or make more dubious the existance of the Higgs-Bosun particle?
Does it have any bearing at all?
Anybody?Would this extra particle tend to confirm the HB or refute it? or remain indifferent?

It is my understanding that, the hypothesised higgs boson is an entirely new ball game HB will essentialy explain why a body feels its mass.
The extra particle will neither confirm nor refute the existence of HB.