SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the extraordinary-claims-require-extraordinary-evidence dept.
Shock result in particle experiment could spark physics revolution
Scientists just outside Chicago have found that the mass of a sub-atomic particle is not what it should be.
The measurement is the first conclusive experimental result that is at odds with one of the most important and successful theories of modern physics.
The team has found that the particle, known as a W boson, is more massive than the theories predicted.
[...] The scientists at the Fermilab Collider Detector (CDF) in Illinois have found only a tiny difference in the mass of the W Boson compared with what the theory says it should be - just 0.1%. But if confirmed by other experiments, the implications are enormous. The so-called Standard Model of particle physics has predicted the behaviour and properties of sub-atomic particles with no discrepancies whatsoever for fifty years. Until now.
CDF's other co-spokesperson, Prof Georgio Chiarelli, from INFN Sezione di Pisa, told BBC News that the research team could scarcely believe their eyes when they saw the results.
"No-one was expecting this. We thought maybe we got something wrong." But the researchers have painstakingly gone through their results and tried to look for errors. They found none.
The result, published in the journal Science, could be related to hints from other experiments at Fermilab and the Large Hadron Collider at the Swiss-French border. These, as yet unconfirmed results, also suggest deviations from the Standard Model, possibly as a result of an as yet undiscovered fifth force of nature at play.
Also at Nature and Ars Technica.
Journal Reference:
T. Aaltonen. S. Amerio. D. Amedei, et. al.,High-precision measurement of the W boson mass with the CDF II detector, Science, (DOI: https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.abk1781)
(Score: 2, Troll) by Mojibake Tengu on Saturday April 09 2022, @07:45PM (4 children)
I suspect deliberate.
Creating a plausible controversial dramatic situation in opaque kind of research (opaque as in 'no true commoner could verify this' fallacy) is a model for asking more of huge amount of money pile. Those people are very smart to begin with, reusing an existing software glitch for the purpose is a no-brainer for them.
New paradigm: Hacked Science.
The edge of 太玄 cannot be defined, for it is beyond every aspect of design
(Score: 3, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 09 2022, @07:55PM
Hacked science? No, MBA science. Stacks of management, protocol, regulatory compliance, ethical compliance, budgetary projection... and 1 Chinese postdoc at the bottom doing the work (badly).
(Score: 4, Funny) by istartedi on Saturday April 09 2022, @08:24PM (1 child)
That's an interesting take, and from your original comment about the software package needing an audit, we can obviously infer it needs a lot of auditors who will be well paid.
Appended to the end of comments you post. Max: 120 chars.
(Score: 2, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 09 2022, @08:35PM
It's an interesting take in the same way that throwing spaghetti bolognese on a canvas is interesting.
(Score: 2) by PiMuNu on Sunday April 10 2022, @04:33PM
I don't think you know what you are talking about.