Is 3.5 tev enough to discover Higgs/SUSY by 2013

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter ensabah6
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the potential of the LHC to discover the Higgs boson and supersymmetry (SUSY) at an energy level of 3.5 TeV, particularly in regions unexplored by the Tevatron. Participants explore the implications of energy levels, data collection timelines, and the calibration of detectors in the context of high-energy physics.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants suggest that the LHC could discover Higgs/SUSY in regions where the Tevatron has not succeeded, depending on the energy and luminosity.
  • Others express uncertainty, stating that the answer is a "definite maybe" and that no one knows for sure if the LHC will succeed.
  • There are discussions about the challenges of detecting a light Higgs, with some indicating that significant work is needed to understand the detectors before achieving a 5 sigma discovery.
  • Participants note that the location of the Higgs mass is crucial; if it is near the Tevatron limits, detection may be easier, but if it is very heavy or light, more data will be required.
  • Some express frustration over the timeline for data collection and analysis, with one participant humorously lamenting the delays caused by technical issues.
  • There are mentions of the current phase being a calibration period for the detectors, with expectations that new physics might emerge once the LHC operates at full capacity at 7 TeV.
  • Concerns are raised about the current data collected, with participants noting that no new physics is expected from the collisions until thorough analysis is conducted.
  • Some participants refer to the standard model, suggesting that if it is correct, the most probable energy regions for finding the Higgs have already been searched, though this is contested by others who see room for theoretical exploration.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views, with no clear consensus on whether the LHC will successfully discover the Higgs or SUSY at the specified energy level. There are competing perspectives on the implications of the standard model and the timeline for data analysis.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the dependence on the assumptions of the standard model, the uncertainty regarding the energy levels where the Higgs might exist, and the unresolved nature of data analysis timelines.

ensabah6
Messages
691
Reaction score
0
based on its currently energy and luminosity, can LHC discover Higgs/SUSY in regions where Tevatron has not been able to, if that is where Higgs is hiding?

(which then gets upgraded to 7 tev)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The best answer is a definite maybe. No one knows for sure one way or the other.
 
Heh, is this for intrade.com ?

Current confidence limits are made assuming the standard model is correct. If there are supersymmetric particles, etc. then things get even more interesting. So we can guess all day.

I have some friends in high energy physics, and it sounds like a light higgs would take a lot of work to understand the detector really well first. So getting that 5 sigma discovery that intrade requires may take awhile even after the first signs of a "bump" are there.
 
It all depends on where it is - if it's just on the high side of the Tevatron limits, that's easy. If it's very heavy or very light it takes much more data.
 
Vanadium 50 said:
It all depends on where it is - if it's just on the high side of the Tevatron limits, that's easy. If it's very heavy or very light it takes much more data.

ok, is it currently collecting data?
 
No. Collisions in 3-3.5 hours at the soonest.
 
Damn it, I really wanted a single flat "Yes"... I know that isn't possible... but I wanted it. Stupid liquid helium, silly gazillion miles of piping and tunnels. I WANT MY HIGGS TODAY, not in a week!

That's in the spirit of normal scientifc inquiry, right? *looks around* right?!

All kidding aside, forget when it starts COLLECTING data... we're talking about a lot of data, are we not? More importantly, how many years would you imagine is a "safe bet" for any form of tastey information to be sifted from the chaff?

Oh, when I die, I would also like to be cremated and stuffed into an active nuclear reactor. Take a particle of "me" that (through enormous expense and countrywide brownouts) has been sufficiently bombarded to become gold... then shove me into a cyclotron, synchroton, or preferably the LHC. My only regret is not being able to see my own hadron jet. :cry:
 
This is more of a calibration period for the detectors and the LHC crew itself. They figured most of their data from these runs will be already known particles, which will help in calibrating the machines to be more accurate. The ramping to 7TeV per in 2 years will be at full capacity of the LHC and that is when the "new physics" should arrive.
 
Vanadium 50 said:
No. Collisions in 3-3.5 hours at the soonest.

Will it be collecting data after collisions? If Higgs or SUSy are part of the collision fragments will there the first detections in detectors?
 
  • #10
ensabah6 said:
Will it be collecting data after collisions? If Higgs or SUSy are part of the collision fragments will there the first detections in detectors?

There have been around a half million events collected within all of the detectors in the past two cycles. They will not know until they have time to analyze all of the data, get rid of corrupt data, and compile it and look for possible candidates. There won't be any new physics coming from these collisions, or so it has been said by those at the LHC.
 
  • #11
JustinLevy said:
Current confidence limits are made assuming the standard model is correct.

If the standard model is correct, the highest probability energy region for finding the Higgs particle has already been searched (This is not me but in a paper I read a while back, though I'm sure some would optimistically disagree, and there seems to be a lot of available theoretical wiggle room for a "standard" model).
 
  • #12
enotstrebor said:
If the standard model is correct, the highest probability energy region for finding the Higgs particle has already been searched (This is not me but in a paper I read a while back, though I'm sure some would optimistically disagree, and there seems to be a lot of available theoretical wiggle room for a "standard" model).

Well, this does seem like an ideal time to adopt a "wait and see" attitude, given that we all have no choice in the matter. :smile:
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
5K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
7K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • Poll Poll
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
7K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K