The W boson mass is exp(-4pi^2) of a Planck mass

In summary, the conversation discusses a coincidence in which the result of 85 GeV is close to the measured mass of 80.4 GeV for exponential times the Planck mass. However, the use of numerology to try and explain this coincidence is not a reliable method in science. Additionally, the calculation used gives a result that is 280 standard deviations away from the measured value, and electroweak radiative corrections also play a role in the mass of the W.
  • #1
franoisbelfor
42
0
Almost: the result is 85 GeV, the measured mass is 80.4 GeV.
Is there anybody who has ever looked at this coincidence?

François
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
there is a thread about this kind of coincidences, https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=46055

For exponential times the Planck mass, there are usually renormalization group arguments: "one expects that Me*sqrt(G)*Exp(1/alpha or similar) to be of order unity, if G is the ultimate cutoff "
 
  • #3
arivero said:
For exponential times the Planck mass, there are usually renormalization group arguments: "one expects that Me*sqrt(G)*Exp(1/alpha or similar) to be of order unity, if G is the ultimate cutoff "

Can you explain the symbols in the expression? Thank you already!

François
 
  • #4
First, numerology is hardly the path to understanding science. It's beloved by crackpots who spend a great deal of time finding simple, or in some cases complex, wholly unmotivated relations between measured quantities. Indeed, in many cases even when better measurements show that these relationships are spurious, the proponents cling to their ideas.

Second, your calculation gives 87.381 +/- 0.004 GeV. The measurement is 80.398 +/- 0.025 GeV. That's 280 standard deviations away, hardly "almost". With such a large number of possible expressions, surely you could have done better than getting within 9% of the measured value. Why 4 pi^2? Why not (283/45)^2?

Third, electroweak radiative corrections, mostly due to the top quark, pull the mass of the W up. Without them, the W would weigh 77.5 GeV. That makes your numerology even worse.
 

What is the W boson mass?

The W boson is an elementary particle that is part of the Standard Model of particle physics. It is responsible for the weak nuclear force and is one of the fundamental particles that make up the universe.

What is the Planck mass?

The Planck mass is a unit of mass that is derived from Planck's constant, the speed of light, and the gravitational constant. It is considered to be the highest possible mass that can exist in the universe.

Why is the W boson mass expressed as exp(-4pi^2) of a Planck mass?

This expression is a result of theoretical calculations and is based on the relationship between the W boson and the Higgs field. The Higgs field gives particles their mass and the W boson's mass is a direct result of its interaction with this field. The value of exp(-4pi^2) is used to account for the strength of this interaction.

How was the W boson mass determined?

The W boson mass was determined through experiments at the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) at CERN. Scientists used data from these experiments to calculate the mass of the W boson and confirmed its value to be close to exp(-4pi^2) of a Planck mass.

What is the significance of the W boson mass being exp(-4pi^2) of a Planck mass?

This relationship between the W boson mass and the Planck mass is significant because it helps to support the Standard Model of particle physics. It also provides insight into the fundamental forces and particles that govern the universe and their interactions with the Higgs field.

Similar threads

  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
11
Views
1K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
19
Views
2K
Back
Top