jump to navigation

Press coverage March 4, 2007

Posted by dorigo in Blogroll, internet, news, personal, physics, science.

Thanks Andrea, I hereby post the link to the New Scientist article about the MSSM Higgs, which cites my analysis (and my bet against new physics!).

Another link caused by keyboard logorrhea is the one from Physics World, which discusses my blog in its “blog of the month” online column.

Finally, there’s quotes of me or my work in Scientific American (March 2007, p.22). 

I have to say I am quite flattered… A bit of surplus motivation towards trying to keep this blog useful for the occasional readers of news at the forefront of high energy physics!



1. island - March 4, 2007

It’s finally all coming down to you guys in the experimental trenches, Tommaso, and you deserve all of the attention that you are finally getting for all of your hard work and ingenious innovations.

I think and hope this positive attention will increase significantly from here/on-out, because you guys rock the world… 🙂

2. Matti Pitkanen - March 4, 2007

I decided to look for the possibility that the 160 GeV anomaly might be Higgs or some other exotic particle suggested by the new physics predicted by TGD. The reasons why I find this interesting are following.

a) In TGD p-adic thermodynamics gives the dominant contribution to fermion masses and Higgs boson gives only a small contribution so that the rates for Higgs production should be much lower via fermionic channels. This could explain why Higgs, even light, has not been detected.

b) This also means that one cannot deduce the best fit for Higgs masses in the range 93-117 GeV from electroweak observables using sensitivity to log(m_H) corrections. Also the lower bound coming from the conditions on the sign of the self coupling lambda of Higgs are lost.

c) The upper bound on lambda and therefore the upper bound for Higgs mass is reduced since the evolution of lambda increases lambda faster than in standard model since the contributions to beta function from top quark are reduced considerably.

d) The new physics predicted by TGD, perhaps already the copy of QCD with mass scale 512 that for ordinary QCD, could be this new physics and might explain the possible 160 GeV anomaly and also the fact that the tau-tau and b-b bumps are not consistent with each other. The pion of the hadron physics associated with Mersenne prime M_89=2^89-1 (ordinary hadron physics corresponds to M_107) would have mass in correct range.

See the discussion at my blog.

Matti Pitkanen

3. Marco - March 4, 2007

Funny how I read the article on New Scientist first (I was surprised you didn’t mentioned it here before)… You’re becoming a star Tommaso…:-)

4. Kea - March 4, 2007

I really appreciate your blog, Tommaso, because for many of us it is the best, if not only, way of trying to follow what is happening in the trenches.

5. dorigo - March 5, 2007

Wow, thank you Island, Marco, Kea, for your kind words and encouragement. I am still on vacation so I can only write two likes of acknowledgements here 🙂


6. dorigo - March 5, 2007

(That is because Gino is buying the wine at the store out here and I don’t want him to make silly choices – red wines are a serious business here!)


7. dorigo - March 5, 2007

Hi Matti,

thank you for your visit. As above, I have no time to look into your ideas, I will upon my coming back end of this week. I am intrigued…


8. Martin Griffiths - March 5, 2007

We even spelt your name right 😉

9. Jester - March 5, 2007

You’ve become a star because you’re running a wonderful blog. An experiment related blog that even a theorist can appreciate, that’s amazing 😉
Carry on and don’t listen to bad tongues: blog IS the proper place for informal discussions.

Sorry comments are closed for this entry

%d bloggers like this: