Simple Supersymmetry Bites the Dust

In summary, the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) has failed to find evidence of "supersymmetric" particles, which many physicists had hoped would fill in gaps in current theories of sub-atomic physics. This has led to the need for a completely new idea in the field. The results were presented at a science meeting in Mumbai and come from the LHC Beauty experiment. This experiment looked at the decay of particles called "B-mesons" and found no evidence of supersymmetric particles, which could explain dark matter and other phenomena. The lack of evidence has caused disappointment and worry among researchers, who are now considering other theories such as "Technicolor". However, some still believe in the beauty and potential of supersymmetry,
  • #1
Dotini
Gold Member
635
231
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-14680570
Results from the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) have all but killed the simplest version of an enticing theory of sub-atomic physics.

Researchers failed to find evidence of so-called "supersymmetric" particles, which many physicists had hoped would plug holes in the current theory.

Theorists working in the field have told BBC News that they may have to come up with a completely new idea.

Data were presented at the Lepton Photon science meeting in Mumbai.

They come from the LHC Beauty (LHCb) experiment, one of the four main detectors situated around the collider ring at the European Organisation for Nuclear Research (Cern) on the Swiss-French border.

According to Dr Tara Shears of Liverpool University, a spokesman for the LHCb experiment: "It does rather put supersymmetry on the spot".

The experiment looked at the decay of particles called "B-mesons" in hitherto unprecedented detail.

If supersymmetric particles exist, B-mesons ought to decay far more often than if they do not exist.

There also ought to be a greater difference in the way matter and antimatter versions of these particles decay.

The results had been eagerly awaited following hints from earlier results, most notably from the Tevatron particle accelerator in the US, that the decay of B-mesons was influenced by supersymmetric particles.

LHCb's more detailed analysis however has failed to find this effect.

Bitten the dust

This failure to find indirect evidence of supersymmetry, coupled with the fact that two of the collider's other main experiments have not yet detected supersymmetic particles, means that the simplest version of the theory has in effect bitten the dust.
Lead ion collisions Collisions inside the LHC should have found some evidence of Supersymmetry by now

The theory of supersymmetry in its simplest form is that as well as the subatomic particles we know about, there are "super-particles" that are similar, but have slightly different characteristics.

The theory, which was developed 20 years ago, can help to explain why there is more material in the Universe than we can detect - so-called "dark matter".

According to Professor Jordan Nash of Imperial College London, who is working on one of the LHC's experiments, researchers could have seen some evidence of supersymmetry by now.

"The fact that we haven't seen any evidence of it tells us that either our understanding of it is incomplete, or it's a little different to what we thought - or maybe it doesn't exist at all," he said.

Disappointed

The timing of the announcement could not be worse for advocates of supersymmetry, who begin their annual international meeting at Fermilab, near Chicago, this weekend.Dr Joseph Lykken of Fermilab, who is among the conference organisers, says he and others working in the field are "disappointed" by the results - or rather, the lack of them.

"There's a certain amount of worry that's creeping into our discussions," he told BBC News.

The worry is that the basic idea of supersymmetry might be wrong.

"It's a beautiful idea. It explains dark matter, it explains the Higgs boson, it explains some aspects of cosmology; but that doesn't mean it's right.

"It could be that this whole framework has some fundamental flaws and we have to start over again and figure out a new direction," he said.

Down the drain

Experimental physicists working at the LHC, such as Professor Nash, say the results are forcing their theoretical colleagues to think again.

"For the last 20 years or so, theorists have been a step ahead in that they've had ideas and said 'now you need to go and look for it'.

"Now we've done that, and they need to go scratch their heads," he said.

That is not to say that it is all over for supersymmetry. There are many other, albeit more complex, versions of the theory that have not been ruled out by the LHC results.

These more complex versions suggest that super-particles might be harder to find and could take years to detect.

Some old ideas that emerged around the same time as supersymmetry are being resurrected now there is a prospect that supersymmetry may be on the wane.

One has the whimsical name of "Technicolor".

According to Dr Lykken, some younger theoretical physicists are beginning to develop completely novel ideas because they believe supersymmetry to be "old hat" .

"Young theorists especially would love to see supersymmetry go down the drain, because it means that the real thing is something they could invent - not something that was invented by the older generation," he said.

And the new generation has the backing of an old hand - Professor George Smoot, Nobel prizewinner for his work on the cosmic microwave background and one of the world's most respected physicists.

"Supersymmetry is an extremely beautiful model," he said.

"It's got symmetry, it's super and it's been taught in Europe for decades as the correct model because it is so beautiful; but there's no experimental data to say that it is correct."
 
Space news on Phys.org
  • #2
This would seem to at least confirm the fairly widespread suspicion the energy levels required to unmask sparticles are much higher than the most optimistic predictions. More discussion here: http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/45182
 

1. What is Simple Supersymmetry Bites the Dust?

Simple Supersymmetry Bites the Dust is a theory in particle physics that proposes the existence of a symmetry between elementary particles and their corresponding "superpartners" with higher masses. This theory has been widely studied and considered a potential solution to certain problems in the Standard Model of particle physics.

2. Why is Simple Supersymmetry Bites the Dust significant?

Simple Supersymmetry Bites the Dust is significant because it provides a potential explanation for the hierarchy problem in particle physics, which refers to the large disparity between the masses of particles such as the Higgs boson and those of their corresponding superpartners. It also offers a potential solution to the dark matter problem, as some supersymmetric particles are candidates for dark matter.

3. What evidence supports or refutes Simple Supersymmetry Bites the Dust?

There is currently no direct experimental evidence that supports or refutes Simple Supersymmetry Bites the Dust. Many experiments have been conducted at the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) in search of supersymmetric particles, but so far, none have been found. This lack of evidence has led some scientists to question the validity of this theory.

4. Are there alternative theories to Simple Supersymmetry Bites the Dust?

Yes, there are several alternative theories to Simple Supersymmetry Bites the Dust, including theories that propose extra dimensions or modifications to the Standard Model. Some scientists also argue that the hierarchy problem and dark matter problem may have different solutions that do not involve supersymmetry.

5. What implications does the potential failure of Simple Supersymmetry Bites the Dust have on the field of particle physics?

If Simple Supersymmetry Bites the Dust is ultimately disproven, it would have significant implications for the field of particle physics. It would mean that our current understanding of the universe and its fundamental particles is incomplete and would require new theories to explain the observed phenomena. It would also challenge the notion of symmetry as a fundamental principle in nature.

Similar threads

  • Beyond the Standard Models
4
Replies
105
Views
10K
  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • STEM Academic Advising
Replies
8
Views
966
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • Other Physics Topics
3
Replies
82
Views
20K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
9
Views
3K
Replies
27
Views
6K
Back
Top