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 Physical Review Letters 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 Standard Model of Physics predicts the rate of strange B-mesons decaying into a pair of oppositely charged muons as exceedingly rare, with only a few decays out of 350 trillion collisions expected.
In the new data from Fermilab's Tevatron particle accelerator, 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 dark matter, 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
-
From lemons to lemonade: Reaction uses carbon dioxide to make carbon-based semiconductor,
32 comments
-
Thioridazine kills cancer stem cells in human while avoiding toxic side-effects of conventional cancer treatments,
3 comments
-
SpaceX private rocket blasts off for space station (Update),
42 comments
-
Climate scientists say they have solved riddle of rising sea,
31 comments
-
SpaceX capsule has 'new car' smell, astronauts say (Update),
2 comments
-
Water flow question
2 hours ago
-
[Drift velocity] Factors affecting velocity
5 hours ago
-
does cold gasoline have less energy
5 hours ago
-
distribution of molecules throughout the atmosphere
7 hours ago
-
The Global Positioning System !
8 hours ago
-
A Question relating Power
9 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 ...
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 ...
May 25, 2012 |
4.3 / 5 (22) |
50
|
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.
May 23, 2012 |
4 / 5 (7) |
15
|
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 ...
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 ...
May 24, 2012 |
5 / 5 (2) |
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 ...
Aug 23, 2011
Rank: 4.1 / 5 (11)
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).
Aug 23, 2011
Rank: 5 / 5 (13)
Whether we are missing a little or a lot to get the whole picture is also pure speculation.
Aug 23, 2011
Rank: 1 / 5 (21)
Wait for it...
Aug 23, 2011
Rank: 1.3 / 5 (16)
Aug 23, 2011
Rank: 4.7 / 5 (13)
Please go spread your religious poppycock elsewhere ... where scientists refuse to tread ...
Aug 23, 2011
Rank: 2.5 / 5 (2)
Aug 23, 2011
Rank: 4.3 / 5 (8)
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.
Aug 23, 2011
Rank: 5 / 5 (19)
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.
Aug 23, 2011
Rank: 4 / 5 (4)
Aug 23, 2011
Rank: 5 / 5 (9)
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.
Aug 23, 2011
Rank: 1 / 5 (5)
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.
Aug 23, 2011
Rank: not rated yet
Aug 23, 2011
Rank: 5 / 5 (5)
Aug 23, 2011
Rank: 5 / 5 (4)
Well what do you expect when you show such a complete ignorance of the scientific method.
Aug 23, 2011
Rank: not rated yet
Aug 24, 2011
Rank: 3 / 5 (4)
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.
Aug 24, 2011
Rank: 1 / 5 (2)
America just can't afford to keep it running.
Aug 24, 2011
Rank: 1 / 5 (1)
Aug 24, 2011
Rank: 3 / 5 (4)
Aug 24, 2011
Rank: 5 / 5 (2)
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.
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...
Aug 25, 2011
Rank: not rated yet
Once we understand the fundamental laws what else is there ??
Aug 29, 2011
Rank: 4.2 / 5 (5)
The precursors to the fundamental laws. :)
Aug 29, 2011
Rank: not rated yet
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.
Aug 29, 2011
Rank: 1 / 5 (1)
Aug 29, 2011
Rank: 1 / 5 (1)
Ok, then the U.S. yearly deficit would be 1,584 billion per year.
Aug 29, 2011
Rank: 1 / 5 (1)
That would simply imply that standard mathematics does not apply to the real world in a 1:1 manner.
Aug 29, 2011
Rank: 4.5 / 5 (2)
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'.