4 June 2011

The standard model holds up to at least 1 TeV

The first 2011 results from the LHC are coming in. In June 2011, the LHC collected much more than 10 times the data collected in 2010. The first published results confirm the predictions by the spaghetti model: no deviations from the standard model were found. And there is no trace of supersymmetry or of new physics.
Above all, see this summary slide.

The investment in the LHC, over 7 billion Swiss Francs, starts looking like the investments in Maddoff's Ponzi scheme: an almost complete loss.

Update:  The newest 2011 data analyses from the LHC, 30 different ones, all imply that the standard model holds up to 1 TeV. This limit will be pushed to 2 TeV in the course of 2011. Recall that for 30 years almost every theoretical particle physicist has sworn that deviations from the Standard model must occur between 1 and 2 TeV ...

3 June 2011

Relative absurdity

Have fun, read arXiv:1106.0313 "Relative locality: A deepening of the relativity principle". It proves that four established physicists are able to write a paper without a single sensible idea.

If their teaching is as bad as their research, their students are having a really bad time ...

31 May 2011

Next effect "beyond" the standard model vanishes

See this link. Still nothing new beyond the standard model, despite rumors to the contrary.

Third spaghetti model issue: U(1)

Electromagnetism has a U(1) gauge. So has the weak hypercharge. Which U(1) group is the one from the spaghetti model? And what is the other U(1) then?

This is the third problem with the strand model. Here is a summary of the three problems:

1 - Why is the fine structure constant for protons and positrons the same?

2 - Why is the weak mixing angle given both by the mass ratio of the weak bosons and by the ratio of the electromagnetic and weak coupling constants?

3 - What are the two U(1) groups of the standard model, electromagnetism and weak hypercharge, in the spaghetti model?

These three questions must be answered to improve the chances of acceptance of the spaghetti model.

Spaghetti issue with electroweak mixing

Here is another issue with the spaghetti/strand model. Electroweak mixing implies that the W/Z mass ratio is the cosine of the weak mixing angle, and that the ratio e/g of the couling constants is the sine of the weak mixing angle. Thus

    (m_W/m_Z)^2 + (e/g)^2 = 1

a relation that had been verified experimentally to great precision. With the spaghetti model, there is no explanation of this relation - none at all!