Tau sneutrino as tachyonic Higgs

  • Thread starter Thread starter mitchell porter
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Higgs
Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the concept of the tau sneutrino as a tachyonic Higgs, proposing that the unbroken Higgs in the standard model could explain OPERA's faster-than-light (FTL) neutrinos, which are thought to transition from mu-neutrinos to tau-neutrinos. There is skepticism regarding the statistical significance of the OPERA results, with a noted 98.6% chance of inaccuracy based on a six-sigma standard. The idea suggests that interactions with a goldstino could allow for mixing between neutrinos and sneutrinos, potentially enabling FTL behavior. However, the notion of tachyonic Higgs is debated, as it implies imaginary mass rather than superluminal speed. The conversation indicates a need for further exploration of these theoretical implications, especially in light of recent confirmations from OPERA.
mitchell porter
Gold Member
Messages
1,520
Reaction score
813
I can't resist voicing this idea. You can see its genesis http://johncostella.wordpress.com/2011/09/28/could-the-opera-tachyon-be-the-unbroken-higgs/" also contributed.

The "logic" is as follows: The unbroken Higgs is a tachyonic object already found in the standard model. OPERA's FTL neutrinos are mu-neutrinos that turn into tau-neutrinos. And the superpartner of the tau-neutrino has the capacity to http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/0005295" the down-type Higgs of the MSSM.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
While this does sound like a good explanation for the supposed superluminal neutrinos, don't forget that the experiment and its results have a statistical signifigance factor of 6. I believe that that means there's a 98.6% chance of it being inaccurate.
 
Doesn't six sigma mean that the possibility of being accurate is 99.99966%?
 
arrektor said:
Doesn't six sigma mean that the possibility of being accurate is 99.99966%?

Maybe. I just read a different article and it seemed like the Sigma factor meant the likely-hood that something's wrong.
 
mitchell porter said:
I can't resist voicing this idea. You can see its genesis http://johncostella.wordpress.com/2011/09/28/could-the-opera-tachyon-be-the-unbroken-higgs/" also contributed.

The "logic" is as follows: The unbroken Higgs is a tachyonic object already found in the standard model. OPERA's FTL neutrinos are mu-neutrinos that turn into tau-neutrinos. And the superpartner of the tau-neutrino has the capacity to http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/0005295" the down-type Higgs of the MSSM.
I also had a similar idea, but was not able to make it more concrete. I hope someone could develop the idea further. This potentially could explain TWO things at once: OPERA experiments and failures to find the massive Higgs particle.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
One problem with this idea is that it's the sneutrino, not the neutrino, which is a tachyon, and the idea of "neutrino-sneutrino mixing" did not appear to make sense.

However, now I'm wondering if you can get particle-sparticle mixing (within the same multiplet) via interactions with a goldstino (the particle which arises from spontaneous breaking of supersymmetry). Could you have a "goldstino VEV" or a "goldstino condensate" which leads to a neutrino spending some time as a sneutrino?

If that were possible, the next problem is that the Higgs is "tachyonic" only in the sense of having imaginary mass, not in the sense of going faster than light. This is the universal conventional understanding, anyway. I speculated http://diracseashore.wordpress.com/2011/09/23/faster-than-light-neutrino-claim/" ).

So, to sum up, the idea here is that you get FTL neutrinos by a goldstino-mediated "superoscillation" into an FTL sneutrino state. Quite possibly this makes no sense mathematically. Also, since there are no extra dimensions or violations of Lorentz invariance involved, the https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=538559" will come up.

But the rumor is that OPERA has confirmed the effect, so we may be headed back to the FTL theoretical races very soon.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
"Supernovae evidence for foundational change to cosmological models" https://arxiv.org/pdf/2412.15143 The paper claims: We compare the standard homogeneous cosmological model, i.e., spatially flat ΛCDM, and the timescape cosmology which invokes backreaction of inhomogeneities. Timescape, while statistically homogeneous and isotropic, departs from average Friedmann-Lemaître-Robertson-Walker evolution, and replaces dark energy by kinetic gravitational energy and its gradients, in explaining...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
6K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 62 ·
3
Replies
62
Views
11K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
5K
  • · Replies 50 ·
2
Replies
50
Views
10K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K