Chamseddine/Connes new paper on noncommutative geometry standard model

In summary, the recent paper by Chamseddine and Connes proposes a correction to the previously predicted Higgs mass of 170 GeV in the Standard Model based on a product of spacetime manifold and noncommutative space. They claim that a term was omitted in the calculation, resulting in the incorrect prediction. However, a new paper by Estrada and Marcolli suggests using renormalization group equations to obtain a realistic Higgs mass without adding a scalar field to the model. Further research and understanding is needed to determine the relevance of these findings.
  • #1
Monocles
466
2
What do you make of this recent paper of Chamseddine and Connes?

Resilience of the Spectral Standard Model

The version of the Standard Model based on a product of the spacetime manifold with a finite noncommutative space had previously predicted a Higgs mass of 170 GeV. Supposedly this paper presents a correction to this calculation that obtains 125 GeV, claiming that essentially a term was left out of the equation to produce 170 GeV that shouldn't have been. I am no expert on this topic though (I like noncommutative geometry but haven't gotten around to learning this specific application of it), so I am wondering if anyone has digested this paper enough to know whether this makes the NCG standard model relevant again or if it is just a trick to obtain the desired Higgs mass.

Alain Connes also made a short blogpost here about the paper.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
An update on this from Estrada and Marcolli

Asymptotic safety, hypergeometric functions, and the Higgs mass in spectral action models

I am surprised that I did not notice this paper sooner. This claims to achieve a realistic Higgs mass estimate using renormalization group equations instead of adding a scalar field to the model as in the Chamseddine Connes paper. Except, in the CC paper, they claim that the scalar field was already in the model, but was previously ignored. But again, I am not sophisticated enough to say much about it. Can anyone make sense of this?
 

1. What is the Chamseddine/Connes new paper on noncommutative geometry standard model?

The Chamseddine/Connes new paper on noncommutative geometry standard model is a recent research paper that proposes a new approach to unifying the fundamental interactions in the Standard Model of particle physics using noncommutative geometry. It builds upon previous work by Chamseddine and Connes, and presents a more comprehensive and mathematically rigorous framework for understanding the fundamental particles and forces that make up our universe.

2. How does noncommutative geometry play a role in this new model?

Noncommutative geometry is a mathematical theory that describes spaces where the order of operations does not matter. In the Chamseddine/Connes model, this theory is applied to the Standard Model, allowing for a more elegant and unified understanding of the fundamental particles and forces. It also provides a possible explanation for the hierarchy problem, which is an unsolved issue in the Standard Model.

3. What are the potential implications of this new model?

If this new model is proven to be correct, it could lead to a better understanding of the fundamental laws of nature and potentially lead to new discoveries in particle physics. It could also provide a more elegant and unified explanation for the physical phenomena that we observe in our universe.

4. What evidence supports the Chamseddine/Connes new paper?

The Chamseddine/Connes new paper is based on a combination of mathematical and theoretical arguments. It also builds upon previous work in the field of noncommutative geometry and has been tested against existing experimental data. However, further research and testing will be needed to fully validate this new model.

5. How does this new model relate to other theories, such as string theory or supersymmetry?

The Chamseddine/Connes model is not directly related to string theory or supersymmetry, but it does offer a potential framework for incorporating these theories into a more unified understanding of the fundamental forces in the universe. Further research and testing will be needed to fully explore these connections and determine the validity of this model in relation to other theories.

Similar threads

Beyond the noncommutative standard model
    • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
14
Views
5K
Does Connes spectral model solves the Hierarchy problem?
    • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
1
Views
2K
Exploring Connes' Finite Noncommutative Geometry Model
    • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
30
Views
7K
Supertrace Sum Rule and Fermi Constant in Electroweak Standard Model
    • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
4
Views
3K
Conference Non-Commutative Geometry, Strings and Gravity
    • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
1
Views
2K
What is the current status of particle physics beyond the standard model?
    • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
1
Views
3K
Connes-Chamseddine: Math Evidence for Kaluza-Klein Theory
    • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
2
Views
3K
New Connes: Gravity and the standard model with neutrino mixing
    • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
20
Views
5K
Merging NCG matter with Spinfoam LQG spacetime (new Pfaeffle-Stephan)
    • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
4
Views
3K
Hot QG+M paper by John Barrett
    • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
14
Views
4K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top