jump to navigation

Scientific wishes for 2009 December 31, 2008

Posted by dorigo in astronomy, Blogroll, cosmology, personal, physics, science.
Tags: , , ,
trackback

I wish 2009 will bring an answer to a few important questions:

  • Can LHC run ?
  • Can LHC run at 14 TeV ?
  • Will I get tenure ?
  • Are multi-muons a background ?
  • Are the Pamela/ATIC signals a prologue of a new scientific revolution ?
  • Will England allow a NZ scientist to work on Category Theory on its soil ?
  • Is the Standard Model still alive and kicking in the face of several recent attempts at its demise ?

I believe the answer to all the above questions is yes. However, I am by no means sure all of them will be answered next year.

Comments

1. piscator - December 31, 2008

hmm, yes for 4 and 6 seems a bit contradictory maybe?

Anyhow, my take is

yes/no/no idea but good luck/yes/no/no idea/unfortunately probably yes

piscator

2. mandeep gill - December 31, 2008

T- while i of course am concerned with (and have faith) in your getting tenure — oh dear GOD i hope the answer to the first 2 q’s is a resounding YES, and IN 2009..!!! :->

y Prospero Ano Nuevo a ti!

(that’s the Spanish, anyway, i don’t know the Italian..)

-M

3. Fred - January 1, 2009

Happy New Year!

T, how many of your 2008 propositions did you manage to keep?

“I am going to lose those ten pounds I have put up last year.
I am going to use ten seconds more than I would think necessary on each slide I show, whatever the content.
I am going to drive ten miles per hour slower than I would find acceptable, wherever I am going.
I am going to spend ten minutes less in front of the computer at home every day.
I am going to wake up ten minutes earlier on weekdays, and ten minutes later on weekends.”

3) Is attaining tenure in Italy synonymous with reaching retirement age status? What are they waiting for, more Euros?

4) M&M’s humor: According to the readers here, you recently wrote an excellent 3 part series on multi-muons and now you have reduced them to background material?!

7) If the Standard Model meets its demise will the next generation of physics be called the New Standard Model or would those involved demand a different label?

dorigo - January 1, 2009

Happy 2009 Fred!
About the 2008 propositions: I did not lose the pounds, nor did I wake up earlier on weekdays, but I kept all others!
Tenure is problematic due to the cuts of the Berlusconi government. I and other 41 winners of a concorso in 2005 have the right by law of getting tenured, but whether that happens depends on political decisions.
The multimuons are still in my mind, and I still want to continue that series, but it requires some free time for thinking.
I think we will cook up something different for the next instantiation of the SM.

Cheers,
T.

4. Fred - January 1, 2009

lol on the weight loss failure because we’re all in the same boat. It becomes a health issue and all vanity issues are thrown out the window. A Stanford Medical article confirmed last August that running increases longevity and improves one’s health especially as we get older. Is running a common activity in Venice?
In trying to understand an iota of what Pamela/ATIC signals are about, I thoroughly enjoyed Jester’s most recent article titled, ‘It’s All Decay’ over at Resonaances. His approach and writing style alone is worth the reading. How does dark matter fit into the Standard Model’s whole scheme of things? Thanks for the sidebar link.

5. Neal - January 1, 2009

Happy New Year, and good luck with tenure. Thanks for all the well written articles.

6. Louise - January 2, 2009

Thanks for concern about the NZ scientist. The year will be full of good news regardless.

7. dorigo - January 2, 2009

Hi Piscator, well, unfortunately I have my doubts on 2) too (as it shows since I included it in the list!)

Thank you Mandeep, happy new year to you too.

Neal, thank you for your appreciation and best wishes.

Hi Louise, yes, I certainly hope so!

Fred: running is nowhere to be seen in Venice – those who insist in doing it are looked at in dismay. About DM: it does not fit well in the SM, but it does fit very well in some SUSY extensions of it. Which does not mean I am going to buy SUSY!

Cheers all,
T.

8. Daniel de França MTd2 - January 5, 2009

I wish that Dorigo helps me to find some bibliography on how to put boundary of the Higgs mass given the Top mass.🙂

9. dorigo - January 5, 2009

huh thats’ right you were asking me for something like that weren’t you ? So sorry. As I come back to work I’ll see what I find.

Cheers,
T.

10. Daniel de França MTd2 - January 6, 2009

Someone pointed me this article:

http://arxiv.org/pdf/hep-ph/0303191

http://www.physicsforums.com/showpost.php?p=2023170&postcount=2

Is that a good one?

Cheers,

Daniel.

dorigo - January 7, 2009

Hi Daniel,

the paper is certainly a serious discussion, and formula 18 tells you something about what you want to know, but not all. It only mentions “logarithmic dependences” of the Higgs mass.

BTW I suggest another paper (by Kuehn) which is more complete as far as top quark physics is concerned: http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/hep-ph/pdf/9707/9707321v1.pdf .

I am still looking for the best reference to the thing you need…

Cheers,
T.

dorigo - January 7, 2009

You can try this one:
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/hep-ex/pdf/0210/0210010v1.pdf
Formula 5 is what you are looking for, but you may need to follow the references to find exact reasons for the dependencies. In any case, the functional form depends on the way the higgs, W and top quarks create loop diagrams.

Cheers,
T.

11. Daniel de França MTd2 - January 7, 2009

Hi Tommaso,

How many Higgs does it take to make sure a Higgs is found?

Cheers,

Daniel de França

dorigo - January 7, 2009

Hi Daniel,

I would tend to say that the answer is “One”, on several levels:
– because of the tautology
– because the SM only has one higgs boson
– because in a few channels one event would stand out against zero background -several particles were discovered in the past like that (the positron, the omega minus, even the Z in a sense).

However, if you ask what is likely to happen, it is that we will need several tens of Higgs boson candidates in order to see an evidence above backgrounds. The topic is too broad to discuss in a comment…

Cheers,
T.

12. Daniel de França MTd2 - January 8, 2009

Hi Tommaso,

It’s the last option, in which you say that it is not possible to answer in a post.

Cheers,

Daniel.


Sorry comments are closed for this entry

%d bloggers like this: