Rare particle decay could mean new physics

August 23, 2011 By Anne Ju

(PhysOrg.com) -- An incredibly rare sub-atomic particle decay might not be quite as rare as previously predicted, say Cornell researchers. This discovery, culled from a vast data set at the Collider Detector at Fermilab (CDF), is a clue for physicists trying to catch glimpses of how the universe began.

The work, which is generating buzz because of its possible implications for the existence of new physics, has been submitted to by an international team of scientists, among them Julia Thom-Levy, Cornell assistant professor of physics, and graduate student Walter Hopkins. The paper is available on arXiv.

Thom-Levy studies the decay of particles formed in high-energy collisions, with particular focus on a class of particles called strange B-mesons that consist of a beauty quark bound to a strange quark. The of Physics predicts the rate of strange B-mesons decaying into a pair of oppositely charged as exceedingly rare, with only a few decays out of 350 trillion collisions expected.

In the new data from Fermilab's , the researchers found four of these decays for every one expected. While the upward fluctuation could be a statistical fluke, it is attracting widespread attention in the field because it might possibly indicate the presence of new particles and lead to an entirely new model of physics.

Over the years, as scientists were able to collide more particles at higher energies, they were able to set upper limits on the probability of such decays. The Fermilab data set has allowed scientists to further narrow the probability of the rate of decay to be between 0.46 and 3.9 x 10-9.

One possible explanation for the observed excess is the existence of supersymmetric particles, for which no evidence yet exists, but which can help explain the origin of , which makes up about one fourth of the universe.

"So this could mean an excess, and it could mean the presence of new particles, but what is needed is a lot more data to really have enough numbers to constrain this more strongly," Thom-Levy said.

Such a larger data set is being worked on now by scientists, including Thom-Levy, at the Large Hadron Collider at CERN, which runs at higher energies than the Tevatron and may eventually confirm the excess in the Fermilab data.

More information: Search for B_s --> mu+mu- and B_d --> mu+mu- Decays with CDF II, arXiv:1107.2304v1 [hep-ex] http://arxiv.org/a … /1107.2304v1

Abstract
A search has been performed for B_s --> mu+mu- and B_d --> mu+mu- decays using 7/fb of integrated luminosity collected by the CDF II detector at the Fermilab Tevatron collider. The observed number of B_d candidates is consistent with background-only expectations and yields an upper limit on the branching fraction of BF(B_d-->mu+mu-) < 6.0E-9 at 95% confidence level. We observe an excess of B_s candidates. The probability that the background processes alone could produce such an excess or larger is 0.27%. The probability that the combination of background and the expected standard model rate of B_s --> mu+mu- could produce such an excess or larger is 1.9%. These data are used to determine BF(B_s-->mu+mu-) = (1.8^{+1.1}_{-0.9})E-8 and provide an upper limit of BF(B_s -->mu+mu-) < 4.0E-8 at 95% confidence level.

Provided by Cornell University search and more info website

4.6 /5 (22 votes)  

Filter


Move the slider to adjust rank threshold, so that you can hide some of the comments.


Display comments: newest first

albenza
Aug 23, 2011

Rank: 4.1 / 5 (11)
Funny. Just as we think we are about to understand what is going on, a new door opens, and we are baffled by the universe yet again.

We are still just learning to walk... Sad as it may seem, I think we still have a very long way to go, before we scratch the surface of how, where and what the universe really is. (That is assuming we ever will).
antialias_physorg
Aug 23, 2011

Rank: 5 / 5 (13)
Careful: 'new physics' doesn't automatically mean that all the 'old physics' is dead wrong...just that we're missing pieces.

Whether we are missing a little or a lot to get the whole picture is also pure speculation.
Mayday
Aug 23, 2011

Rank: 1 / 5 (21)
The history of science is so funny and also ironic.("ironical" is actually the right word, but it sounded too funny to type in) Over and over, new discoveries are made and we are greeted with a chorus of scientists rushing to defend their "belief" in the old "facts." Yet they shower unending disdain on people who "believe" in matters of spirit. Too bad one can't obtain a grant for practicing spirituality.

Wait for it...
PHANT0M PARTICLE
Aug 23, 2011

Rank: 1.3 / 5 (16)
God im soooo sick of hearing about " dark matter and "dark energy" why OH why dont the physicists just say " We dont know what is at work here ,when we figure it out we will give " it" a real name"
tkjtkj
Aug 23, 2011

Rank: 4.7 / 5 (13)
Too bad one can't obtain a grant for practicing spirituality.

Wait for it...


Please go spread your religious poppycock elsewhere ... where scientists refuse to tread ...

hard2grep
Aug 23, 2011

Rank: 2.5 / 5 (2)
I see preparedness on the part of waiting physicists. As it grows late in the higgs hunting season, they are realizing that there may be something in the numbers that suggests an alternate outcome. At least if we are wrong, then we still have a shot at figuring out gravity.
antialias_physorg
Aug 23, 2011

Rank: 4.3 / 5 (8)
dark matter and "dark energy" why OH why dont the physicists just say " We dont know what is at work here ,when we figure it out we will give " it" a real name"

because occasionally scintists have to talk to each other about observable efects - and then it#s god to have common terminology.

The term 'dark' already signifies that there doesn't yet exist a really a solid framework for either the energy/matter thus denoted.
For now we only know what it does (drives cosmic expansion, reates gavity lensing effects) and what it doesn't do (doesn't interact with ordinary matter/radiation)

You can count on it that when physicists figure out what these things really are (and there will probably more than the two categories as I suspect there will be an entire 'dark zoo') that they will be given other names.
Baseline
Aug 23, 2011

Rank: 5 / 5 (19)
The history of science is so funny and also ironic.("ironical" is actually the right word, but it sounded too funny to type in) Over and over, new discoveries are made and we are greeted with a chorus of scientists rushing to defend their "belief" in the old "facts." Yet they shower unending disdain on people who "believe" in matters of spirit. Too bad one can't obtain a grant for practicing spirituality.
he funds raised here have been keeping the world in darkness and reinforcing the
Wait for it...


You already have a process for that and it's been in place for a very long time it's called the collection plate. The money raised there has been keeping man in ignorance for centuries, no need for yet another mechanism for keeping us from progress.
fmfbrestel
Aug 23, 2011

Rank: 4 / 5 (4)
Another advancement of physics by an accelerator scheduled to be mothballed. Hope those scientists are preparing for their upcoming unemployment filing.
antialias_physorg
Aug 23, 2011

Rank: 5 / 5 (9)
Don't worry too much about the scientists. They have good qualifications and are versatile enough to be employable in a wide range of fields (scientific or at a company doing R&D).

Heck, I had twice the situation that a non-renewable contract ran out during my scientific career (three times if you count the time I got my degree at university) - each time I had to write a grand total of one job application to find something new and interesting to do. And I am probably just an average researcher in my field.
SteveL
Aug 23, 2011

Rank: 1 / 5 (5)
Sometimes (often) I check the stats in articles.
From the article: "but which can help explain the origin of dark matter, which makes up about one fourth of the universe."

Which matches up with "Dark matter makes up about 25%." from: http://science.na...-energy/ :

From Wikipedia http://en.wikiped...k_matter : "From these figures, dark matter constitutes 83%, (23/(23 4.6)), of the matter in the universe, whereas ordinary matter makes up only 17%."

I truly wish those who write informative articles to disseminate information to the masses would keep their information updated.
Jaeherys
Aug 23, 2011

Rank: not rated yet
Dark matter makes up ~25% of the total energy but ~83% of the total matter.
fmfbrestel
Aug 23, 2011

Rank: 5 / 5 (5)
@antialias Good to know, but the point remains, we are shutting down a perfectly good facility which is still contributing cutting edge research. Cern might have a more powerful accelerator, but (if you forgive the analogy) having the most powerful telescope imaginable does not grant you enough time to scan the universe at full power. Being the second best does not imply having no value.
NameIsNotNick
Aug 23, 2011

Rank: 5 / 5 (4)

Wait for it...


Well what do you expect when you show such a complete ignorance of the scientific method.
wordofmouth
Aug 23, 2011

Rank: not rated yet
I'm confident more new physics will come from crashing particles. If it's found that the higgs-bonson doesn't exist, this opens even bigger doors for exploration.
Vendicar_Decarian
Aug 24, 2011

Rank: 3 / 5 (4)
"Yet they shower unending disdain on people who "believe" in matters of spirit" - Foofa

Ya, those silly scientists and their silly scientific ways. When will they ever learn that Spiritualism has cured more diseases than they will ever cure.

Vendicar_Decarian
Aug 24, 2011

Rank: 1 / 5 (2)
"the point remains, we are shutting down a perfectly good facility which is still contributing cutting edge research." - fmf

America just can't afford to keep it running.
StarGazer2011
Aug 24, 2011

Rank: 1 / 5 (1)
'implied non em-interactive matter' would be a better term than 'dark matter' , its not dark, its transparent :) And at this point is just an artifact of an incomplete model, possibly it exists as WIMPS or MACHOS or possibly there are a range of new phenomena and adjustments to /replacements of theory required to explain observations.
StarGazer2011
Aug 24, 2011

Rank: 3 / 5 (4)
@Vendicar : Maybe if the USA decomissions a couple of stealth bombers, or I dunno ... stopped bailing out failed Wall St gamblers, they could afford something useful.
antialias_physorg
Aug 24, 2011

Rank: 5 / 5 (2)
Good to know, but the point remains, we are shutting down a perfectly good facility which is still contributing cutting edge research. Cern might have a more powerful accelerator, but (if you forgive the analogy) having the most powerful telescope imaginable does not grant you enough time to scan the universe at full power. Being the second best does not imply having no value.

Agreed. I did not mean to imply that it's a good idea to shut down the Fermilab collider. E.g. just buying one stealth fighter less could keep that facility running for the next decade.

'implied non em-interactive matter' would be a better term than 'dark matter'

You're welcome to submit that to the relevant people. The term 'dark matter' wasn't coined with its use in pop-sci magazines in mind.

But, alas, such are political prioriies...
El_Nose
Aug 25, 2011

Rank: not rated yet
the Higg's by 2012 and tests for super symmetry by 2014 --

Once we understand the fundamental laws what else is there ??
Deesky
Aug 29, 2011

Rank: 4.2 / 5 (5)
the Higg's by 2012 and tests for super symmetry by 2014 --

Once we understand the fundamental laws what else is there ??

The precursors to the fundamental laws. :)
antialias_physorg
Aug 29, 2011

Rank: not rated yet

Once we understand the fundamental laws what else is there ??

The thing is: There are no fundamental laws.

If there were the one could always ask: Where did they come from? What makes them the way they are? Why aren't they different?

The thing about askin after fundamentals is: You always imply a causation principle (of which itself you could ask: why causation?).
Causation also always implies a temporal vector, which itself isn't always a given (especially around the big bang and maybe not with singularities)

So the question of searching for 'fundamentals' may be flawed in itself.
Remember that these laws we search for are only models for observations. And it seems that either we must model in a wholly different (i.e. atemporal) way or just settle for 'good enough' at some point.
rawa1
Aug 29, 2011

Rank: 1 / 5 (1)
So far LHC effectively disproved most of theoretical physics of the last forty years: Higgs, SUSY and WIMPS, Technicolor, extradimensions, leptoquarks, Randall-Sundrum gravitons, micro-black holes, CPT violation for antimatter...
Vendicar_Decarian
Aug 29, 2011

Rank: 1 / 5 (1)
"Maybe if the USA decomissions a couple of stealth bombers, or I dunno .." - SAtargaser

Ok, then the U.S. yearly deficit would be 1,584 billion per year.

Vendicar_Decarian
Aug 29, 2011

Rank: 1 / 5 (1)
"So the question of searching for 'fundamentals' may be flawed in itself. " - Antial..

That would simply imply that standard mathematics does not apply to the real world in a 1:1 manner.
antialias_physorg
Aug 29, 2011

Rank: 4.5 / 5 (2)
That would simply imply that standard mathematics does not apply to the real world in a 1:1 manner.

Yes. I don't think it is a given to assume that a modeling tool (which is what mathematics is) should therefore auto"magically" be able to encompass each and very aspect of the thing it models.

The map is not the territory.

The final problem is: It COULD all be chance. There COULD actually be no forces/laws whatsoever. Getting 1000 times 'heads' on a coin toss means that the probability for a completely random coin is still not zero.
So whatever law we come up with - no matter how perfectly it seems to fit with all future observations - we can never be 100% sure if it actually maps to some underlying principle or whether it's just a fluke.*

* Note that I'm in no way suggeting that we should therefore abandon the search for ever more fundamental laws - quite the opposite. Just that that search is unlikely to ever have an end or lead to a fundamental/unambiguous 'truth'.
Rank 4.6 /5 (22 votes)
Relevant PhysicsForums posts
  • Water flow question
    created2 hours ago
  • [Drift velocity] Factors affecting velocity
    created5 hours ago
  • does cold gasoline have less energy
    created5 hours ago
  • distribution of molecules throughout the atmosphere
    created7 hours ago
  • The Global Positioning System !
    created8 hours ago
  • A Question relating Power
    created9 hours ago
  • More from Physics Forums - General Physics

More news stories

Is a classical electrodynamics law incompatible with special relativity?

(Phys.org) -- The laws of classical electromagnetism that were developed in the 19th century are the same laws that scientists use today. They include Maxwell’s four equations along with the Lorentz la ...

Physics / General Physics

created May 24, 2012 | popularity 4.7 / 5 (17) | comments 43 | with audio podcast feature

Landmark calculation clears the way to answering how matter is formed

(Phys.org) -- An international collaboration of scientists, including Thomas Blum, associate professor of physics, is reporting in landmark detail the decay process of a subatomic particle called a kaon – ...

Physics / General Physics

created May 25, 2012 | popularity 4.3 / 5 (22) | comments 50 | with audio podcast

Lying in wait for WIMPs: Researchers seek to dramatically increase sensitivity of Large Underground Xenon detector

Although it's invisible, dark matter accounts for at least 80 percent of the matter in the universe. No one knows what it is, but most scientists would bet on weakly interacting massive particles, or WIMPs.

Physics / General Physics

created May 23, 2012 | popularity 4 / 5 (7) | comments 15 | with audio podcast

Hawaii lab turns laser-powered bubbles into microrobots

(Phys.org) -- A team of scientists from the University of Hawaii are working on microrobots created from bubbles of air in a saline solution. The bubbles take on their title of “robots” as a laser ...

Physics / General Physics

created May 23, 2012 | popularity 5 / 5 (4) | comments 2 | with audio podcast weblog

Sound increases the efficiency of boiling

Scientists at the Georgia Institute of Technology achieved a 17-percent increase in boiling efficiency by using an acoustic field to enhance heat transfer. The acoustic field does this by efficiently removing vapor bubbles ...

Physics / Soft Matter

created May 24, 2012 | popularity 5 / 5 (2) | comments 2


Change in developmental timing was crucial in the evolutionary shift from dinosaurs to birds: study

At first glance, it's hard to see how a common house sparrow and a Tyrannosaurus Rex might have anything in common. After all, one is a bird that weighs less than an ounce, and the other is a dinosaur that ...

Computer model used to pinpoint prime materials for efficient carbon capture

When power plants begin capturing their carbon emissions to reduce greenhouse gases – and to most in the electric power industry, it's a question of when, not if – it will be an expensive undertaking.

'Unzipped' carbon nanotubes could help energize fuel cells, batteries

Multi-walled carbon nanotubes riddled with defects and impurities on the outside could replace some of the expensive platinum catalysts used in fuel cells and metal-air batteries, according to scientists at ...

T cells 'hunt' parasites like animal predators seek prey, study shows

By pairing an intimate knowledge of immune-system function with a deep understanding of statistical physics, a cross-disciplinary team at the University of Pennsylvania has arrived at a surprising finding: T cells use a movement ...

Manufacturing genes to attack flu virus

An international research team has manufactured a new protein that can combat deadly flu epidemics.

Yale study concludes public apathy over climate change unrelated to science literacy

Are members of the public divided about climate change because they don't understand the science behind it? If Americans knew more basic science and were more proficient in technical reasoning, would public consensus match ...