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) by turgid on Sunday April 10 2022, @08:39AM (3 children)
They're human like the rest of us and make mistakes. Also, they're scientists and probably don't have very much training in software development so the quality of their code might not be that great. It's undoubtedly very clever code, but probably badly structured and full of subtle bugs that they haven't noticed particularly in corner cases.
I refuse to engage in a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent [wikipedia.org].
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday April 10 2022, @11:23PM (2 children)
Y'all software guys bitch about shitty software development, like, all the time. Don't be projecting your bullshit onto actually smart people. Physicists created The Bomb while you bitches only created Windows.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 11 2022, @09:44PM
Funny how that turns out.
In my experience, the worst customers are doctors. "Rawr! I am doctor! I studied for more than a decade to be a doctor! You are a meat-thing, crawling on your lips through a sewer of electrons!"
"OK, great, then fix it with your scalpel. Or, you could listen to someone who spent years taking courses that weren't in med school, to resolve the problems that your med school training left you."
(Score: 2) by turgid on Friday April 15 2022, @10:28AM
I never said they weren't smart. I started out there myself and I know just how smart they are. What I was saying is that they haven't had the same amount of training in the ways of software, so their software tends to be of relatively poor quality. Mind you, there's a lot of software written by software professionals that's of poor quality, like Windows.
I refuse to engage in a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent [wikipedia.org].