Insights Blog
-- Browse All Articles --
Physics Articles
Physics Tutorials
Physics Guides
Physics FAQ
Math Articles
Math Tutorials
Math Guides
Math FAQ
Education Articles
Education Guides
Bio/Chem Articles
Technology Guides
Computer Science Tutorials
Forums
Classical Physics
Quantum Physics
Quantum Interpretations
Special and General Relativity
Atomic and Condensed Matter
Nuclear and Particle Physics
Beyond the Standard Model
Cosmology
Astronomy and Astrophysics
Other Physics Topics
Trending
Featured Threads
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Classical Physics
Quantum Physics
Quantum Interpretations
Special and General Relativity
Atomic and Condensed Matter
Nuclear and Particle Physics
Beyond the Standard Model
Cosmology
Astronomy and Astrophysics
Other Physics Topics
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
More options
Contact us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
Physics
Beyond the Standard Models
How credible are CKM matrix limits on new physics?
Reply to thread
Message
[QUOTE="Urs Schreiber, post: 6064099, member: 567385"] When you say that energies around 500,000 TeV "haven't existed" since around the big bang, you are thinking of average energies, hence of temperature scale. But for single particles such energies are not out of the question. The 500,000 TeV that you name is 0.5 EeV, and particles of energy a few EeV are observed, rarely but regularly, to hit Earth's atmosphere, as seen by the Auger Observatory, see e. g. "Ultra-high energy cosmic rays" [URL='https://arxiv.org/abs/1612.08188']arxiv.org:1612.08188[/URL] Observing such natural events can conceivably shed light on BSM physics. In fact such a claim was made just four days ago (this particular claim may or may not hold water, but it shows that the general possibility exists):[SIZE=6][B]The ANITA Anomalous Events as Signatures of a Beyond Standard Model Particle, and Supporting Observations from IceCube[/B] [B][URL='https://arxiv.org/abs/1809.09615']arxiv.org:1809.09615[/URL][/B] [/SIZE] [URL='https://arxiv.org/search/astro-ph?searchtype=author&query=Fox%2C+D+B']Derek B. Fox[/URL], [URL='https://arxiv.org/search/astro-ph?searchtype=author&query=Sigurdsson%2C+S']Steinn Sigurdsson[/URL],[URL='https://arxiv.org/search/astro-ph?searchtype=author&query=Shandera%2C+S']Sarah Shandera[/URL], [URL='https://arxiv.org/search/astro-ph?searchtype=author&query=M%C3%A9sz%C3%A1ros%2C+P']Peter Mészáros[/URL],[URL='https://arxiv.org/search/astro-ph?searchtype=author&query=Murase%2C+K']Kohta Murase[/URL], [URL='https://arxiv.org/search/astro-ph?searchtype=author&query=Mostaf%C3%A1%2C+M']Miguel Mostafá[/URL],[URL='https://arxiv.org/search/astro-ph?searchtype=author&query=Coutu%2C+S']Stephane Coutu[/URL] (Submitted on 25 Sep 2018) Abstract: The ANITA collaboration have reported observation of two anomalous events that appear to be εcr≈0.6 EeV cosmic ray showers emerging from the Earth with exit angles of 27∘ and 35∘, respectively. While EeV-scale upgoing showers have been anticipated as a result of astrophysical tau neutrinos converting to tau leptons during Earth passage, the observed exit angles are much steeper than expected in Standard Model (SM) scenarios. Indeed, under conservative extrapolations of the SM interactions, there is no particle that can propagate through the Earth with probability p>10−6 at these energies and exit angles. We explore here whether "beyond the Standard Model" (BSM) particles are required to explain the ANITA events, if correctly interpreted, and conclude that they are. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Post reply
Forums
Physics
Beyond the Standard Models
How credible are CKM matrix limits on new physics?
Back
Top