Interview: 'Next year we will see the Higgs particle - or exclude its existence'
Siegfried Bethke in front of the Atlas Detector at the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) in Geneva. © MPI for Physics
(PhysOrg.com) -- Interview with Prof. Dr. Siegfried Bethke, Director at the Max Planck Institute of Physics in Munich, about the current research results from the Large Hadron Collider (LHC).
Professor Bethke, particles have been colliding with each other at the LHC for two years now, the detectors have so far registered close to one thousand billion collisions. Has it brought us any further?
Bethke: We have been searching very hard, but the LHC has not yet been able to discover previously unknown particles. Even effects which would hint at new theories or even a new physics have failed to materialise.
That is a sobering thought.
Bethke: It is indeed slightly disappointing, but it is not unexpected. We knew right from the start that we would need a huge number of collisions for convincing statistics. This is why the LHC will operate not only for two years, but for ten or 20. Secretly, we had nonetheless hoped that nature would have a surprise in store for us at an earlier stage. But still, even without nature’s help, way over 100 scientific publications have been published so far.
What are they about, if you haven’t discovered anything?
Bethke: Even if you don’t find anything, it is possible to determine exclusion limits for the phenomena you are seeking, for the super-symmetric quarks, for example, whose existence would expand the current model of particle physics. We know now that they must be at least 1,000 times heavier than protons. This sounds boring at first, but is very interesting for physicists and for the formulation of new theories. In addition, we have used the LHC as planned to check the current standard model of elementary particle physics.
What did you have to check there?
Bethke: We know that the standard model cannot be nature’s final answer. It has too many unanswered questions, it is far removed from a theory of everything. At high energies, in particular, we expect deviations. We can now test these regions for the first time at the LHC.
And, have you already refuted the model?
Bethke: On the contrary, so far the measurement results match the theoretical predictions very well, even at high energies. This is fine for the standard model, of course, but as far as a new physics is concerned, it is almost a disappointment.
And what about the mysterious Higgs particle, which is deemed to be responsible for providing elementary particles with their mass in the current model? Nobody has seen it so far.
Bethke: We have not yet seen an unambiguous positive signal, either. We can already exclude many regions, however, so that only a few corners remain for the Higgs particle to hide. We want to intensify our search at these energies in the coming year. It would be a triumph if we were to find the particle.
And if not, would it be a serious defeat?
Bethke: No, not at all. If we could definitely exclude the existence of the Higgs boson on the basis of our measurements, it would even be a revolution. We would have to scrap the standard model. Theoreticians would have to look for an alternative theory which can conclusively describe the world down to the tiniest detail. This would be significantly more exciting than simply confirming the Higgs particle.
When will you be certain?
Bethke: The LHC has been running unexpectedly well for more than a year now and providing us with more data than we had hoped for even under the most optimistic assumptions. If it continues like this, we will have seen the Higgs particle by the end of next year at the latest – or will be able to exclude its existence once and for all.
The interview was conducted by Alexander Stirn.
Provided by
Max-Planck-Gesellschaft
-
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),
4 comments
-
Why does a boiled egg rotates while a raw egg doesn't?
1 hour ago
-
Lightning strike in mindair
2 hours ago
-
Why does light move?
3 hours ago
-
How to calculate the repulsion force between a permanent and an electromagnet?
5 hours ago
-
Why does light allow us to see things?
5 hours ago
-
Room temperature superconductivity
5 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) |
52
|
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) |
17
|
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
Stunning image of smallest possible five-ringed structure
Scientists have created and imaged the smallest possible five-ringed structure about 100,000 times thinner than a human hair and you'll probably recognise its shape.
'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 ...
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.
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 ...
Land and sea species differ in climate change response: study
(Phys.org) -- Marine and terrestrial species will likely differ in their responses to climate warming, new research by Simon Fraser University and Australia’s University of Tasmania has found.
Nov 24, 2011
Rank: 1 / 5 (10)
helps you with Vortex Spiral Dual mode and links to Universal Plasma Energy Model.
PLASMA VISION OF THE UNIVERSE-1993 (Reg No: TXu 729718 ) (No# Pages-95, Figures 58)
THE VISION OF COSMIC TO *PREM UNIVERSE-1995 (Reg No: TXu 893693 ) *PREM: Plasma
Regulated Electro-Magnetic Universe (No# Pages 148, Figures 56)
One can read book: Cosmic Consciousness to Cosmology Revision-2000(Reg No:TXu 982-559) (No#
Pages 94, Figures 16)-by Vidyardhi Nanduri
[Research 2003(V Nanduri):
www [dot] ociw [dot] edu/ociw/symposia/series/symposium3/proceedings [dot] html]
[link]
http://www.scribd...erse-200
COSMIC Pot Universe model http://adsabs.har......STSCI SYMPOSIUM MAY 2003
http://adsabs.har...mpE..37N ....Cosmology Structures-Carneie-OCIW-2003
Vidyardhi Nanduri
Nov 24, 2011
Rank: 1 / 5 (10)
After all, even the Standard Model predicts no particular mass for Higgs boson - which effectively means, it doesn't require it for any quantitative predictions. The less or more defined mass of Higgs is predicted with supersymmetric extensions of Standard model, which require nearly one hundred of additional parameters, which aren't available experimentally by now.
Nov 24, 2011
Rank: 3 / 5 (2)
Nov 24, 2011
Rank: 1 / 5 (1)
Nov 24, 2011
Rank: 5 / 5 (1)
You are right in the sense that obviously the table of particles that is the Standard model would be okay minus the lack of Higgs, but the Higgs mechanism for electroweak symmetry breaking and fermion mass generation would need to be re-worked. And since that part makes up the SU(2)xU(1) of the SU(3)xSU(2)xU(1) Standard model of gauge interactions, the Standard model WOULD have the be fundamentally changed.
Nov 25, 2011
Rank: 2 / 5 (3)
Nov 25, 2011
Rank: 3.5 / 5 (2)
yeah, thats true. it at first kind of sounded like one of the off the wall comments we see regularly where a bunch of people who's name i wont mention chimes in how this or that kills the standard model and it all needs to be thrown away because 1 little parrt of it was different than we expected or not completely understood right away or our knowledge was incomplete.
Nov 25, 2011
Rank: not rated yet
Well, if it was found out that the Higgs boson doesn't exist, yet the gauge theory behind the Standard model requires it, then the theory becomes unacceptable. The Standard Model might have some trouble predicting masses, but it does make the prediction that the Higgs boson exists, so not finding it would be a big blow. Of course we can still go about using the Standard model for calculations and stuff with very good accuracy, but it wouldn't change the fact that there is a need to find a new theory because it would have failed on a pretty big prediction.
Nov 25, 2011
Rank: 1 / 5 (2)
http://en.wikiped..._problem
It's actually quite physical model under current situation, which we are facing by now at the LHC.
I don't want to play a devil's advocate for Standard Model, because I do believe, we have much better and more predicative models already, both formal (Heim's theory), both nonformal ones (dense aether theory) - but with respect to Higgs boson mass problem the Standard Model provides exactly what we are observing by now - i.e. nothing. If it would lead into some particular Higgs boson mass, it would be disproven already with LHC experiments, don't you think?
Nov 25, 2011
Rank: 1 / 5 (3)
Completely disagree about the Higgs: It would be A Staggering defeat for the Std.Model, which has withstood every expt. test for 30 yrs, based upon the existence of the Higgs boson. Starting over is Not an option, for to modify the SM, & still reproduce its successes, is highly improbable.
The graveness of the situation is best illustrated by the recent exclusion of SUSY & extra dimensions, Essential for string theory. Nor were black holes seen. If the Higgs is not found, it will continue a dark period for theoretical particle physics going on 40yrs now.
Nov 25, 2011
Rank: 1 / 5 (4)
The SUSY belongs into same cathegory, because the neutrino is actually a WIMP and a lightest photino too. Microblack holes are common atom nuclei, stabilized with extradimensions.
It means, the mainstream theorists are actually quite right - they just cannot recognize their own concepts in the everyday reality.
Nov 25, 2011
Rank: 1 / 5 (1)
Nov 26, 2011
Rank: 5 / 5 (1)
Nov 26, 2011
Rank: 1 / 5 (1)
How is it that we have spirals at every other level where forces are involved but not at the smallest?
Nov 26, 2011
Rank: not rated yet
I and other physicists are well aware of the limitations and problems with the Higgs mechanism. But all theories have limitations, and part of science is knowing how well our theories work, and in what situations have our theories been tested. As much as you might not like some of the implications (most physicists don't "like" the hierarchy problem), that doesn't give us the right to just willy-nilly throw out a model that has been successful in all tested regimes so far.
Also, if it turns out that it is wrong, that is a problem with the particular gauge theory we have, not gauge theories in general.
Nov 27, 2011
Rank: 1 / 5 (2)
Nov 27, 2011
Rank: 1 / 5 (3)
Nov 27, 2011
Rank: 5 / 5 (1)
The difference is that in one case, rawa1 seems to think we should abandon it for personal reasons of taste or feelings for how the universe should be, not experimental; whereas if experimentally we can't find the Higgs, then we have experimental reasons for throwing it out/altering it.
Also, could you tell me what you mean by "[the Higgs] cannot exist"?
Nov 27, 2011
Rank: 1 / 5 (3)
Nov 27, 2011
Rank: 3 / 5 (2)
Again, this is just a matter of taste. The Higgs mechanism entails the introduction of a scalar particle (Higgs) such that it breaks the symmetry of the electroweak interaction to give rise to the familiar photon, and massive weak bosons. So you're right that is a mechanism, but that mechanism requires this scalar Higgs particle. Just because it's mass happens to be a parameter of the model doesn't mean it "cannot" exist (btw, size is a fuzzy concept in particle physics). Also, this is very much not like a 5th force because the Higgs mechanism doesn't introduce any new force carrying particles.
Nov 27, 2011
Rank: 1 / 5 (2)
Nov 27, 2011
Rank: 1 / 5 (4)
http://aetherwave...age1.gif
But the elementary particles are too small and fuzzy for to have some internal structure. In this case the shielding force becomes proportional to the size of particle itself, not to size of some even smaller particle inside. Which means, the rest mass of force carrying bosons will depend on the size of shielding particle itself. These bosons can still exist, but they're too different each other. Got it?
Nov 27, 2011
Rank: 3 / 5 (2)
This sounds oddly familiar. Deja Vu all over again?
Nov 27, 2011
Rank: 3.6 / 5 (5)
like many prominent scientists of the past, i am a religious man.
i like metaphysics, theology and speculative hypotheses about special properties of consciousness, however...
when i come to a science website i want to talk and hear about science, you know, experiments with verifiable phenomena.
keep your personal drively goopta flaky newage nonsense to yourselves and go discuss to on a shirley mclaine blogsite.
or something...
or else!
so there!
and it takes one to know one, too!!!