• CMS & ATLAS have published their Higgs results.
    23 replies, posted
[quote] [h2]Atlas[/h2] =========================================================== [B]Combined search for the Standard Model Higgs boson using up to 4.9 fb−1 of pp collision data at with the ATLAS detector at the LHC[/B] Source: [URL]http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0370269312001852[/URL] [URL]http://arxiv.org/abs/1207.7214[/URL] =========================================================== [/quote] [quote] [h2]CMS[/h2] =========================================================== [B]Observation of a new boson at a mass of 125 GeV with the CMS experiment at the LHC[/B] Source: [URL]http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0370269312008581[/URL] [URL]http://arxiv.org/abs/1207.7235[/URL] =========================================================== [/quote] Atlas results are now 5.9σ at 126.0 ±0.4 GeV CMS results are now 5.8σ at 125.3 ±0.4 GeV Un-fucking-believable..
I have no idea what any of what you posted means.
Yeah, can anyone explain the numbers? Is it like new fields where they are going to search? Or something?
I no speak fysic.
CMS and ATLAS have refined their results since the July 4th announcement, as well as published the results in scientific journals. Read more here: [url]http://phys.org/news/2012-09-higgs-boson-landmark-key-hurdle.html[/url]
[QUOTE=Bradyns;37614247]CMS and ATLAS have refined their results since the July 4th announcement, as well as published the results in scientific journals. Read more here: [url]http://phys.org/news/2012-09-higgs-boson-landmark-key-hurdle.html[/url][/QUOTE] You should probably say what they're announcing in the OP.
[QUOTE=Rents;37614194]I have no idea what any of what you posted means.[/QUOTE]σ is the Greek letter Sigma, in it's lower-case form it's often used to represent a level of certainty based off of standard deviation (go have a glance at it on Wikipedia). A 5 sigma level of certainly is usually required in physics to classify something as a discovery, and correlates to a 1 in 2 million chance it's a fluke or error. GeV is giga electronvolts, or one billion electron volts, and eV is generally used in particle physics to denote how much energy a particle has or is needed to do something with them (for example, the energy of a photon is between 1.5-3.5 eV); in this case it's the energy of the decay signature of the Higgs boson or something along those lines; one of Facepunch's resident physics buffs can explain it better.
[QUOTE=Sgt Doom;37614281]σ is the Greek letter Sigma, in it's lower-case form it's often used to represent a level of certainty based off of standard deviation (go have a glance at it on Wikipedia). A 5 sigma level of certainly is usually required in physics to classify something as a discovery, and correlates to a 1 in 2 million chance it's a fluke or error. GeV is giga electronvolts, or one billion electron volts, and eV is generally used in particle physics to denote how much energy a particle has or is needed to do something with them (for example, the energy of a photon is between 1.5-3.5 eV); in this case it's the energy of the decay signature of the Higgs boson or something along those lines; one of Facepunch's resident physics buffs can explain it better.[/QUOTE] I somewhat understand.
[QUOTE=Sgt Doom;37614281]σ is the Greek letter Sigma, in it's lower-case form it's often used to represent a level of certainty based off of standard deviation (go have a glance at it on Wikipedia). A 5 sigma level of certainly is usually required in physics to classify something as a discovery, and correlates to a 1 in 2 million chance it's a fluke or error. GeV is giga electronvolts, or one billion electron volts, and eV is generally used in particle physics to denote how much energy a particle has or is needed to do something with them (for example, the energy of a photon is between 1.5-3.5 eV); in this case it's the energy of the decay signature of the Higgs boson or something along those lines; one of Facepunch's resident physics buffs can explain it better.[/QUOTE] I knew most of that, but the OP doesn't give anything other than numbers and the source links to the paper it's self, I was expecting a news article.
Energy, since it's directly proportional to mass (See, E=mc^2 does mean something), is used in particle physics to describe the mass of particles [editline]10th September 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Rents;37614334]I knew most of that, but the OP doesn't give anything other than numbers and the source links to the paper it's self, I was expecting a news article.[/QUOTE] In the science world, things come in papers, not news articles
[QUOTE=download;37614441]In the science world, things come in papers, not news articles[/QUOTE] I ain't reading all that shit
So they basically narrowed down their test results, making it easier for physicists to determine exactly what it is that they discovered.
[QUOTE=Rents;37614473]I ain't reading all that shit[/QUOTE] Then expect to not fully understand it, and it's not shit.
[QUOTE=download;37614441]Energy, since it's directly proportional to mass (See, E=mc^2 does mean something), is used in particle physics to describe the mass of particles [editline]10th September 2012[/editline] In the science world, things come in papers, not news articles[/QUOTE] They should make eV [electron volts] an SI unit.
[QUOTE=Rents;37614473]I ain't reading all that shit[/QUOTE] most articles that are about science are usually just sensationalized stuff
[QUOTE=QuikKill;37614764]Then expect to not fully understand it, and it's not shit.[/QUOTE] No shit I won't fully understand it, I'm not a physicist, even the abstract is unintelligible to me, that's why stuff like this is usually posted with an article giving a summary of what the paper says.
Basically, 5.9 sigma is a 1 in 300 million chance it's a mistake. So either they've found the Higg's Bosun, or something very similar.
[QUOTE=SataniX;37615434]Basically, 5.9 sigma is a 1 in 300 million chance it's a mistake. So either they've found the Higg's Bosun, or something very similar.[/QUOTE] Why can't they say 1 in a 300,000,000 like a normal person.
[QUOTE=Garik;37615718]Why can't they say 1 in a 300,000,000 like a normal person.[/QUOTE] Because they're not normal people?
does it have 0 spin? [editline]10th September 2012[/editline] don't have time to look on the article
[QUOTE=DrBreen;37615742]does it have 0 spin? [editline]10th September 2012[/editline] don't have time to look on the article[/QUOTE] 360 degree spin
[QUOTE=Garik;37615718]Why can't they say 1 in a 300,000,000 like a normal person.[/QUOTE] same reasons we measure earthquakes on a log scale [editline]10th September 2012[/editline] ie it's just more convenient
[QUOTE=Garik;37615718]Why can't they say 1 in a 300,000,000 like a normal person.[/QUOTE] because the standard deviation is the actual value they calculate and scientists know what it means so they have no reason to convert
[QUOTE=DainBramageStudios;37615905]same reasons we measure earthquakes on a log scale [editline]10th September 2012[/editline] ie it's just more convenient[/QUOTE] 1 for tiny shakes. 5 for medium shakes. 10 for big shakes. [editline]10th September 2012[/editline] much easier [editline]10th September 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Bradyns;37614140]Atlas results are now 5.9σ at 126.0 ±0.4 GeV CMS results are now 5.8σ at 125.3 ±0.4 GeV [/QUOTE] Basically what they are saying is that the detectors and detected something with the mass 125.3 and 126.0 GeV/c^2 with an error value of 0.4. It is 5.8 standard deviations "away" from if a particle wouldn't exist (ugh bad sentence). So, the closer the standard deviation is to 0, the large is the chance that's it's something else and not the Higg's boson.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.