- #1
Trollfaz
- 140
- 14
So far no signs of supersymmetry has been found though there are theoretical support for it. Is supersymmetry still possible or has it been proven wrong?
Is supersymmetry still possible or has it been proven wrong?
Eddington said:The law that entropy always increases, holds, I think, the supreme position among the laws of Nature. If someone points out to you that your pet theory of the universe is in disagreement with Maxwell's equations — then so much the worse for Maxwell's equations. If it is found to be contradicted by observation — well, these experimentalists do bungle things sometimes. But if your theory is found to be against the second law of thermodynamics I can give you no hope; there is nothing for it but to collapse in deepest humiliation.
This seems harsh. The standard model made no prediction for the mass of the Higgs. Experiments ruled out more and more parameter space until it was discovered. Supersymmetry makes very definite predictions given a choice of model and parameters. Experiments can rule out more parameter space until confirmation or loss of interest. Loss of interest does not necessarily mean supersymmetry is not part of nature.MathematicalPhysicist said:How did Eddington phrased it:
People will still publish theories on Supersymmetry, LQG, Superstring theories even if they don't provide any testable predictions, you could always argue we need more energies.
I don't think you can call these "theories" since you don't predict something, you just tweaking the parameters post experiments.
MathematicalPhysicist said:I don't think you can call these "theories" since you don't predict something, you just tweaking the parameters post experiments.
haushofer said:From naturalness argument people expected SUSY to kick in at the 1TeV scale (this was motivated by radiative corrections for the Higgs boson). So our notion of naturalness seems to be wrong. Theoretically, SUSY could still be there, but it becomes more and more improbable (in a Bayesian sense).
I think in the future people will regard SUSY as a useful mathematical tool which aided us to get certain insights, like dualities. And, of course, in retrospect it's always easy to say "it was wrong", but the theoretical motivations for it were very solid. From e.g. SU(5)-unification we know however that nature does not always follow our notion of beauty.
Supersymmetry is a theoretical concept in physics that proposes a symmetry between particles with different spin values. It suggests that every known particle has a "superpartner" with a different spin, and these particles have the same mass and interactions.
Supersymmetry is important because it could potentially solve some of the unanswered questions in particle physics, such as the hierarchy problem and the nature of dark matter. It also provides a framework for unifying the fundamental forces of nature.
There is currently no experimental evidence for supersymmetry, despite many years of research and experiments. This has led some scientists to question the validity of the theory and propose alternative explanations for the unanswered questions in particle physics.
The main challenge in proving the existence of supersymmetry is that it requires particles with much higher energy levels than those currently achievable in experiments. This makes it difficult to test the theory and find evidence for the predicted superpartners.
Yes, there are several ongoing experiments and research projects related to supersymmetry, including the Large Hadron Collider at CERN. Scientists are also exploring alternative theories and models that could potentially explain the unanswered questions in particle physics without the need for supersymmetry.