New evidence suggests particles detected in Antarctica don't fit Standard Model

October 1, 2018 by Bob Yirka, Phys.org report
The ANITA-IV experiment in Antarctica, prior to being launched on a balloon. Credit: Drummermean/CC BY-SA 4.0

A team of researchers at Penn State University has found new evidence that suggests some particles detected in Antarctica do not fit the Standard Model. They have written a paper outlining their arguments and have posted it on the arXiv preprint server.

Prior research has shown that when low energy cosmic encounter the Earth, they are likely to pass right on through—high energy particles, on the other hand, are almost certain to run into something else, preventing them from passing through in one piece. Instead, they cause an avalanche of collisions, creating a shower of particles that eventually emerge on the other side of the planet. But what if a high-energy particle were to make it all the way through without creating a particle shower? That would mean there likely exists a particle that is not described by the Standard Model—and that is exactly what researchers studying particles detected over Antarctica are reporting.

To date, two odd particle events have been detected by a sensor attached to a high-altitude balloon hovering over Antarctica as part of a project called the Antarctic Impulsive Transient Antenna (ANITA)—the first detection was back in 2006, the second in 2014. Both indicated that a high-energy particle had somehow made its way through the planet without encountering anything. The first detection was attributed to equipment problems or some other unknown factor. The second caused more concern—but not enough for anyone to seriously consider challenging the Standard Model. In this new effort, the researchers report that they have found other evidence of the same type of particle, suggesting the two anomalies might truly represent unknown particles.

The new evidence came in the form of sensor data from the IceCube experiment in which buried in the Antarctic ice continually detect particle events. Data from the sensors showed that three events with unexplained properties had occurred. The researchers suggest the two unconnected sources of data indicate that it is time to start asking whether the anomalies hint at the possibility of particles beyond the Standard Model.

Explore further: Hunting for dark quarks

More information: The ANITA Anomalous Events as Signatures of a Beyond Standard Model Particle, and Supporting Observations from IceCube, arXiv:1809.09615 [astro-ph.HE] arxiv.org/abs/1809.09615

Related Stories

Hunting for dark quarks

August 31, 2018

Quarks are the smallest particles that we know of. In fact, according to the Standard Model of particle physics, which describes all known particles and their interactions, quarks should be infinitely small. If that's not ...

Mysterious IceCube event may be caused by a tau neutrino

June 19, 2018

Eight years ago, the IceCube detector, a research center located at the South Pole to detect neutrinos emanating from the cosmos, was commissioned. Three years later, it began to register the first momentous results. The ...

Long live the doubly charmed particle

May 25, 2018

Finding a new particle is always a nice surprise, but measuring its characteristics is another story and just as important. Less than a year after announcing the discovery of the particle going by the snappy name of Ξcc++ (Xicc++), ...

12 matter particles suffice in nature

December 13, 2012

How many matter particles exist in nature? Particle physicists have been dealing with this question for a long time. The 12 matter particles contained in the standard model of particle physics? Or are there further particles ...

Maybe it wasn't the Higgs particle after all

November 7, 2014

Last year CERN announced the finding of a new elementary particle, the Higgs particle. But maybe it wasn't the Higgs particle, maybe it just looks like it. And maybe it is not alone.

Recommended for you

Researchers study interactions in molecules using AI

October 19, 2018

Researchers from the University of Luxembourg, Technische Universität Berlin, and the Fritz Haber Institute of the Max Planck Society have combined machine learning and quantum mechanics to predict the dynamics and atomic ...

Pushing the extra cold frontiers of superconducting science

October 18, 2018

Measuring the properties of superconducting materials in magnetic fields at close to absolute zero temperatures is difficult, but necessary to understand their quantum properties. How cold? Lower than 0.05 Kelvin (-272°C).

The big problem of small data: A new approach

October 18, 2018

Big Data is all the rage today, but Small Data matters too! Drawing reliable conclusions from small datasets, like those from clinical trials for rare diseases or in studies of endangered species, remains one of the trickiest ...

12 comments

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

torbjorn_b_g_larsson
4.5 / 5 (11) Oct 01, 2018
These observations suffer from rare statistics of course, and tying them together is model dependent.

But both the observations and the SUSY "standard" model are exciting, so this deserves to be kept in mind IMO while waiting for more data.
Mimath224
5 / 5 (4) Oct 01, 2018
I read about this elsewhere last week and it is indeed interesting. However, as a layman, I sometimes find that the trail 'goes dead' and I hear nothing more. So I hope those closer to the events keep the info coming.
Osiris1
1 / 5 (1) Oct 01, 2018
tachyons!?
leetennant
4.4 / 5 (7) Oct 01, 2018
As torbjorn points out, this is just as likely to be a failure of math as an actual anomaly. Still, I don't think anybody believes the Standard Model is comprehensive so I'd be excited to see anything that expands our knowledge beyond it.
Surveillance_Egg_Unit
2.3 / 5 (6) Oct 02, 2018
A failure of math? lee, you've got to be joking. Math is the superlative gift to science. It is the Standard Model of the Standard Model.
But really, a new particle might explain a few things and would have to be given a name quickly - outside of the LHC.
Ryan1981
3.7 / 5 (3) Oct 02, 2018
Reminds me of the faster then light neutrino's which turned out to be a loose cable.
antigoracle
not rated yet Oct 02, 2018
This makes me wonder if the Universe's particle generators can be used to test String theory.
rrwillsj
1 / 5 (1) Oct 02, 2018
Here's an update that may, eventually help clarify the confusion.

https://phys.org/...ube.html
leetennant
1 / 5 (1) Oct 02, 2018
Reminds me of the faster then light neutrino's which turned out to be a loose cable.


Or CSIRO's quest for the mysterious Peryton emissions that turned out to be emitted by their microwaves if they opened the door before ending the cooking cycle.
Kalopin
1 / 5 (1) Oct 03, 2018
...ya know, there was a collision of two neutron stars last year?.. #kilonova
Osiris1
not rated yet Oct 03, 2018
warp signature?
MRBlizzard
not rated yet Oct 05, 2018
The Russians reported the same thing more than 10 years ago. Cascades of particles rising up through the Earth. I think they had more statistics.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.