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

I What is the Madala boson at LHC?

  1. Sep 7, 2016 #1
    anyone have any idea what the Madala boson that supposedly is found in LHC data?

    obviously it is proposed to explain dark matter, but it is a spin-0 field related to the Higgs.

    claim is that Madala boson mediates the dark sector.

    supposedly a 3-sigma excess at 270 GeV


    Scientists predict the existence of a new boson: New Madala boson ...
    Phys.Org-Sep 6, 2016
    However, where the Higgs boson in the Standard Model of Physics only interacts with known matter, the Madala boson interacts with Dark
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Sep 7, 2016 #2

    ohwilleke

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    A recent paper on the subject is here http://arxiv.org/abs/1606.01674 (the most recent one seems to be an abridged version of this one) and one of the earlier papers is http://arxiv.org/abs/1506.00612

    The summary at the end of the recent paper states:

     
  4. Sep 7, 2016 #3
    do you think it's plausible? supposedly a 3-sigma excess this time at 270 gev
     
  5. Sep 7, 2016 #4

    ohwilleke

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    No. That was 3 sigma after run-1. I'm pretty sure that the signals are weaker now and 3 sigma isn't even that big a deal once you consider look elsewhere effects, and the theory isn't terribly well motivated.
     
  6. Sep 7, 2016 #5
    I also don't really get how they come to the conclusion of ##3\sigma## in the earlier paper, from a statistics point of view. Why are they only considering one degree of freedom?
     
  7. Sep 7, 2016 #6
    yes i'm surprised there's no update on this 270 gev - recall 750 diphoton bump

    but it's only *today* sept 7 2016 that all the physics news are reporting it

    Scientists predict the existence of a new boson: New Madala boson ...
    Phys.Org-Sep 6, 2016
    The Wits Madala project team consists of approximately 35 young South African and African students and researchers who are currently ...
    CERN LHC: New Madala boson predicted that interacts with dark ...
    International Business Times UK-6 hours ago
    Breakthrough 'Madala Boson' Could Unlock the Mysteries of Dark ...
    Futurism-3 hours ago
    New CERN LHC Experiments --"Predict a Boson Beyond the Higgs ...
    The Daily Galaxy (blog)-Sep 6, 2016
    A 'God particle' called Madala
    Local Source-Times LIVE-Sep 5, 2016
    Researchers claim 'Madala boson' could help explain dark matter
    In-Depth-Daily Mail-Sep 6, 2016
     
  8. Sep 7, 2016 #7

    ohwilleke

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    The science press responds to press releases and somebody issued one even though there is no good reason to think that this is more promising than it was yesterday.
     
  9. Sep 7, 2016 #8
  10. Sep 7, 2016 #9
    the paper was based on a diphoton in 2015 run at 272 gev - i think the paper was reporting what LHC cern was reporting.

    on aug 2016 cern reported no deviations from SM, no SUSY no 750 diphoton
     
  11. Sep 7, 2016 #10
    I am pretty sure there was no ##3\sigma## excess at ##270~\mathrm{GeV}## in 2015 data. The paper does a combined fit to a large variety of observables, diphoton spectra amongst them. But all measurements they use are in agreement with the SM.
     
  12. Sep 7, 2016 #11

    ohwilleke

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Sometimes a paper submitted earlier gets a press release when it is published in a journal, resulting in a time lag.
     
  13. Sep 7, 2016 #12
    The compatibility of LHC Run 1 data with a heavy scalar of mass around 270\,GeV
    Stefan von Buddenbrock, Nabarun Chakrabarty, Alan S. Cornell, Deepak Kar, Mukesh Kumar, Tanumoy Mandal, Bruce Mellado, Biswarup Mukhopadhyaya, Robert G. Reed
    (Submitted on 1 Jun 2015 (v1), last revised 15 Nov 2015 (this version, v2))
    The first run of the LHC was successful in that it saw the discovery of the elusive Higgs boson, a particle that is consistent with the SM hypothesis. There are a number of excesses in Run 1 ATLAS and CMS results which can be interpreted as being due to the existence of another heavier scalar particle. This particle has decay modes which we have studied using LHC Run 1 data. Using a minimalistic model, we can predict the kinematics of these final states and compare the prediction against data directly. A statistical combination of these results shows that a best fit point is found for a heavy scalar having a mass of 272+12−9\,GeV. This result has been quantified as a three sigma effect, based on analyses which are not necessarily optimized for the search of a heavy scalar. The smoking guns for the discovery of this new heavy scalar and the prospects for Run 2 are discussed.
     
  14. Sep 7, 2016 #13
    Yes, that is the paper @ohwilleke linked and I was talking about... ?
     
  15. Sep 7, 2016 #14

    Vanadium 50

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Education Advisor

    First, any physicist can write a phenomenology paper. Make predictions, discuss the agreement with data, whatever.

    What is not done is for a subset of an experiment, in this case ATLAS, to claim a discovery in that experiments' data. When one joins an experiment, one joins a collaboration that has set up procedures for what needs to happen for the experiment as a whole to claim discovery - for example, there may be an internal group whose job it is to check the claim before going public.

    In this case, there are three possible sources for the discovery claim.

    One is the researchers themselves. If this is the case, they have demonstrated a lack of scientific integrity, and ATLAS is well within its rights to remove them from the collaboration. They may have little choice.

    A second is the press office of Wits. If this is the case, it means they did not clear it with the researchers, and got the story wrong. This is sloppy to the point of incompetent. It would be entirely appropriate for the DG of CERN to call the VC of Wits and explain how bad this makes Wits look.

    The third possibility is that both the Wits press office and the researchers got the story right, and the sources that repeated it screwed it up. That means those sources have no qualms about and no protection from posting stories that are false. In that case, why should we believe anything those outlets ever write?
     
  16. Sep 8, 2016 #15

    ohwilleke

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    I strongly suspect that your second hypothesis is the most likely. University, press offices, particularly when issuing releases about scientific findings, routinely botch reports of their own researchers in ways that cross lines that the researchers themselves never would, and exaggerate the significance of the new findings. PhD comics ran a "so true its hilarious" run of comics about the phenomena a year or two ago, and I'd considered finding them and incorporating them in my original post. For example, this one: https://tapastic.com/episode/18523

    In my experience, while secondary media outlets utilizing a press release sometimes compound the errors in the original press release, about 90% of the distortion applies at the level that the press release creates relative to the original research and perhaps 10% of the distortion arises in select retellings, mostly because only a handful of media outlets have staff who have the resources and intellectually capacity to expand much on the original material. That kind of analytical consideration of new results is normally limited to expertise only found in the blogosphere of physics/science bloggers and Internet forums such as this one (outside formal scientific publication, of course, which generally just ignores press releases entirely).

    The trouble is that university PR office staff aren't really qualified to write intelligent press releasees on this stuff either much of the time, and have strong incentives to hype new research from their institution even if that hype is unjustified, because it can drive positive benefits for the institution (like donor and legislator enthusiasm for future research funding) even if the results are actually overhyped.
     
  17. Sep 8, 2016 #16

    Vanadium 50

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Education Advisor

    Here is what the authors say in their report to their sponsors:

    The Wits press release says:

     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?
Draft saved Draft deleted