The discussion revolves around the implications of recent null results from the Large Underground Xenon (LUX) dark matter experiment and the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) on the existence of dark matter candidates, specifically neutralinos and the lightest supersymmetric particle (LSP). The conversation explores theoretical interpretations, potential modifications to existing physics, and the nature of dark matter.
Participants express a range of views on the implications of the experimental results, with no consensus on the existence of LSPs or neutralinos as dark matter candidates. There is ongoing debate about the nature of dark matter and the adequacy of current theoretical frameworks.
Limitations include the dependence on definitions of dark matter candidates, the complexity of experimental signatures, and the unresolved nature of theoretical implications based on current exclusion limits.
This discussion may be of interest to those studying particle physics, cosmology, and theoretical physics, particularly in the context of dark matter research and the implications of experimental findings.
Where would such a significant likelihood come from?Buzz Bloom said:Therefore one can conclude that no LSPs were found, and that there is a significant likelihood that they do not exist as a kind of DM.
mfb said:Where would such a significant likelihood come from?
The exclusion limits keep improving, but you can always reduce couplings to make the particles invisible to current experiments.
lhc is based on finding missing energy. none found.mfb said:My post applies to both LHC and direct dark matter searches like XENON.
I would think that if dark matter isn't found then perhaps we should be tweaking Newton's laws; I mean besides MOND which is only modifying Newton's laws, perhaps a serious shakeup in the fundamentals of physics is due.kodama said:Large Underground Xenon dark matter experiment and LHC have reported a null result on searches for dark matter, with new bounds.
What are the implication of these new bounds on neutralinos and LSP?
Missing energy is one part of the signature of possible dark matter-like particles, but the searches are more complex than that.kodama said:lhc is based on finding missing energy. none found.
Every new theory has to satify constraints from thousands of measurements. That is a huge challenge. If you just start making up hypotheses, they will fail to agree with many of those experimental results.MathematicalPhysicist said:I would think that if dark matter isn't found then perhaps we should be tweaking Newton's laws; I mean besides MOND which is only modifying Newton's laws, perhaps a serious shakeup in the fundamentals of physics is due.
mfb said:Missing energy is one part of the signature of possible dark matter-like particles, but the searches are more complex than that.
No dark matter found so far: sure. It would be impossible to miss such a discovery.Every new theory has to satify constraints from thousands of measurements. That is a huge challenge. If you just start making up hypotheses, they will fail to agree with many of those experimental results.
mfb said:Missing energy is one part of the signature of possible dark matter-like particles, but the searches are more complex than that.
No dark matter found so far: sure. It would be impossible to miss such a discovery.Every new theory has to satify constraints from thousands of measurements. That is a huge challenge. If you just start making up hypotheses, they will fail to agree with many of those experimental results.
Hi @mfb:mfb said:Where would such a significant likelihood come from?
mfb said:Well, something particle-like is quite likely based on cosmological observations, but it does not have to be a supersymmetric particle, sure. Supersymmetry does not have to exist at all.
how adjustable is the coupling for neutralinos and other WIMPS?mfb said:In particle physics such a classification does not make sense. Both "waves" and "particles" are described with the same framework of quantum field theory.
are you HEP? i ask bc i wonder if ultra-light scalar field dark matter is perhaps the best theory, esp with current exclusion limits from LUX.mfb said:I'm not a theoretician, but in general the phase spaces are usually larger than the exclusion limits experiments can set.