Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Run 2 initial LHC @13 TEV Supersymmetry results null

  1. Dec 15, 2015 #1
    what are ramifications of exclusions on SUSY gluino mass 1.8 TEV to MSSM and other SUSY-SM and higgs hirearchy?
     
    Last edited: Dec 15, 2015
  2. jcsd
  3. Dec 15, 2015 #2

    fresh_42

    Staff: Mentor

  4. Dec 15, 2015 #3
    i am wondering how exclusions affect hiearchy SUSY solution
     
  5. Dec 15, 2015 #4

    ohwilleke

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    The diphoton bumps are much more significant for assessing the situation than the exclusions. The new bumps are consistent with some sort of two Higgs doublet model including but not limited to SUSY, although it is somewhat unexpected from a SUSY perspective for an extra Higgs boson to be the lightest supersymmetric particle.
     
  6. Dec 15, 2015 #5
    with Gluino masses excluded up to 1.8 Tev, can low-energy scale SUSY still stabilize the higgs ?

    if SUSY does not stablize the Higgs what does?
     
  7. Dec 16, 2015 #6

    Haelfix

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    If the diphoton event is indeed pointing to a bonafide new particle (and I am a little skeptical at this point), and we make the additional assumption that the current exclusions on other searches hold, then I think this is pointing to rather complicated new physics, at least if we insist on naturalness and other niceties of model building.

    In particular its very hard make the MSSM (in the decoupling limit) work with this data. The existence of this particle would very likely (depending on how the measurement of the width holds up) nearly completely exclude most of its parameter space, and you would need to take extreme limits in order not to damage the existing known standard model like couplings for the regular Higgs. Likely one needs an extension of the MSSM to something like say the nMSSM to have enough model building wriggle room. Similarly its been pointed out to me that it is also difficult to make a Higgs doublet model work for very similar reasons.

    Anyway, this is nonminimal enough that it's going to occupy the majority of theorists time for the next year while the experimental situation is worked out.
     
  8. Dec 16, 2015 #7

    mfb

    User Avatar
    2016 Award

    Staff: Mentor

  9. Dec 16, 2015 #8
  10. Dec 16, 2015 #9

    mfb

    User Avatar
    2016 Award

    Staff: Mentor

    Or simply more data. Run 2 just started, with 4/fb the discovery potential is still quite small. If we don't find anything with 50-100/fb, things are more challenging.
     
  11. Dec 17, 2015 #10
    That we could not rediscover any Higgs Boson seems to me a hint.
    In all other cases like W or Z Boson we could rediscover every time easily in new rounds with higher energy. In natural sciences we live from reproducing experiments to have a proof of existing a phenomen, we can describe. Here it seems we have the first time running after a ghost.
    We will see, what the next rounds will tell. But I think that we have to build a much much bigger particle accelerator to find something in high energy scale. Then we can maybe take away sponatanous symmetrybreaking out of our model. And maybe we can find then an Axion without mass and then without symmetrybreaking and higgsmechanism. But I would guess, that we need then a minimum of 500 km accelerator
     
  12. Dec 17, 2015 #11

    Vanadium 50

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Education Advisor

    A hint of what exactly?

    The amount of data collected at 13 TeV is too small. CMS' position is that it is so small that it's not worth looking at yet. ATLAS looked, and sure enough, CMS was right.
     
  13. Dec 17, 2015 #12

    mfb

    User Avatar
    2016 Award

    Staff: Mentor

    I looked into the sky and I failed to rediscover Uranus today. I did see the Moon easily. Is Uranus still there? Well, I'm quite sure, but I would need binoculars or a telescope to see it.
    A clear Higgs "re-discovery" in 2015 would have been inconsistent with previous measurements.
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook




Similar Discussions: Run 2 initial LHC @13 TEV Supersymmetry results null
Loading...