
Unexpected evidence of a new particle at LHC - jonbaer
http://www.nature.com/news/who-ordered-that-1.19514
======
mojoe
So just to be clear, this particle is not predicted by the standard model? I'm
no physicist, but that seems like a huge deal.

~~~
gibybo
The standard model currently has 17 particles[1]. This number has grown over
time, most recently when the Higgs boson was added a few years ago. The
standard model makes no claim as to how many particles there can be, what
their masses should be, what spin they should have, and so on. Those are
unsolved questions outside of the scope of the standard model. Instead, it
uses the particles we know about to make predictions about how they behave.

A new particle doesn't necessarily violate the standard model in the same way
that discovering a new element wouldn't necessarily violate the periodic
table. It could just expand the types of predictions that it is capable of
making. It is also possible that a new particle could have properties that do
violate constraints predicted by the standard model, but I don't know it well
enough to know whether this particular particle does so.

[1]
[https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/00/Standard...](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/00/Standard_Model_of_Elementary_Particles.svg)

~~~
soheil
> If it turns out to be true, the chart linked below showing the 17 known
> elementary particles would be expanded to show an 18th.

no, actually the standard model would fundamentally break down. The math does
not allow for such a heavy particle. No charts could save it.

~~~
cshimmin
That's not really the case. The standard model would need to be extended, sure
(as the 750 GeV particle isn't predicted by the current SM). But there's no
fundamental reason this can't be done; in fact in the weeks following this
announcement by ATLAS/CMS, there were literally hundreds of theory models
posted to the arXiv, claiming to extend the SM to account for the (potential)
new resonance.

~~~
AnimalMuppet
But the fact that there were hundreds of theory models posted means that there
is no "standard model" for this new particle at the moment (if it is a real
particle).

------
pjc50
Last time there was an "unexpected reading", we spent 3 months being excited
about faster-than-light particles until someone found the error. Let's not get
too excited just yet.

~~~
abricot
I'll take three months of excitement, damn the consequences.

~~~
dennisnedry
The pursuit of discovering something new and interesting that could
potentially change your entire understanding of the universe, is what makes
science so utterly satisfying. It's like being re-born. Everything you once
knew was completely wrong and you have to re-learn everything.

~~~
lagadu
> Everything you once knew was completely wrong and you have to re-learn
> everything.

It's really cool in practice but the way you phrased it makes it sound
dreadful :)

------
junto
Can anyone tell me if there are any practical applications for this, or it is
'just' a further understanding of the world around us (albeit an important
one)?

~~~
FeepingCreature
It is about thirty to fifty years too early to expect any practical
applications from this.

~~~
adrianN
The coolest thing we can do with the last unexpected particle, the muon, is
this:

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muon-
catalyzed_fusion](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muon-catalyzed_fusion)

It's not in the "Mr. Fusion" stage, of course, but pretty neat nonetheless.

------
abricot
"[...] before the experiment shut down for its winter recess."

Can anyone shine a light on why the particle accellerator needs recess?

~~~
77pt77
Geneva needs power for the winter.

(not joking)

[http://home.cern/about/engineering/powering-
cern](http://home.cern/about/engineering/powering-cern)

"At peak consumption, usually from May to mid-December, CERN uses about 200
megawatts of power, which is about a third of the amount of energy used to
feed the nearby city of Geneva in Switzerland."

~~~
jessriedel
Well, not quite. They don't shutdown in the first place because of the power
usage, but they choose the timing for the shutdown when it is most economical.
Regular maintenance is unavoidable.

------
CIPHERSTONE
ELI5: Presumably this was a result of the LHC's power upgrade to 13 TeV. If
so, should they now be able to repeatedly get these results again and again?

~~~
AnimalMuppet
Yes, the energy needed was reachable because of the upgrade. And yes, they
should be able to repeatedly get there.

------
UweSchmidt
About time! I can see how scientists were excited when the LHC confirmed
existing theories, but the thing was kinda expensive, so it would be nice to
get some new physics out if it instead of just a "yup we were right".

------
tobias2014
This is one case of ambulance chasing:
[http://arxiv.org/abs/1603.01204](http://arxiv.org/abs/1603.01204)

EDIT: I just noticed that this is also linked in the article.

------
CPLX
"An unexpected data signal that could change everything has particle
physicists salivating."

I know I'm like an old man screaming into the wilderness, but I can't be the
only one that's profoundly sad that even nature.com has to resort to this sort
of horrible clickbait formulation for a headline.

Notwithstanding my aesthetic dislike of it, the thing about these headlines
that makes me really upset is the fact that _they aren 't actually telling the
truth._

Not to be pedantic, but they have not observed any particle physicists with an
unusual amount of saliva, presumably. There is no anecdotal or visual evidence
of people drooling, nothing.

It seems to me this is like the most horrible way to start off an article in a
publication that is _about the scientific method_ for gods sakes, where
precision and accuracy is sort of the whole point.

Would it really be so hard to have a headline like "Shocking and unexpected
evidence of a new particle" or something similar that actually says or at
least approximates what the news is?

~~~
Certified
I got to the second sentence before getting frustrated with the integrity of
an article by Nature:

"They have tried to recreate dark matter, reveal extra dimensions of and
collapse matter into microscopic black holes."

The missing word was slightly irksome. I find the claim that anyone has
intentionally tried to create microscopic black holes bombastic.

CERN's own site:

"According to the well-established properties of gravity, described by
Einstein’s relativity, it is impossible for microscopic black holes to be
produced at the LHC. There are, however, some speculative theories that
predict the production of such particles at the LHC. All these theories
predict that these particles would disintegrate immediately. Black holes,
therefore, would have no time to start accreting matter and to cause
macroscopic effects." \- [http://press.web.cern.ch/backgrounders/safety-
lhc](http://press.web.cern.ch/backgrounders/safety-lhc)

They have certainly looked into it for safety sake but if CERN's intent was to
create microscopic black holes, I suspect it would be a very different
machine.

~~~
pif
> They have certainly looked into it for safety sake

Actually, when I worked at CERN there was never much fuss about such risks.
The tunnel is just 100 m under, but I've yet to hear from someone worried
about his house being sucked in.

~~~
jjoonathan
They aren't worried _because_ they looked into it. You could argue that
"comparing max theoretical energy to that of cosmic rays" doesn't constitute
"looking into it" but that's splitting hairs.

------
crdb
The Trisolarians are coming!

~~~
Cyph0n
Sophon lockdown begins?

~~~
crdb
Finishing Dark Forest made me really wish I could speak and read fluent
mandarin, so that I wouldn't have to wait another 4 months for the final
volume! They pushed the publication date back again...

~~~
Cyph0n
Oh that's sad to hear. It's one of the best sci-fi series I've ever read no
doubt.

~~~
pavel_lishin
I had some serious problems with the Three Body Problem, which annoyed me
enough to put a pause on reading the next novel. I loved all the interpersonal
stuff - I haven't liked a character as much as I like Big Shi in a long time -
but the tech and science of it seemed implausible to me.

It's hard to go into details without being spoilerific, but: the problem is
hard to _solve_ , but you can still make very useful short-term predictions;
the technology they have access to is being insanely under-utilized given
their goals; and I don't believe the actions of the scientists given how they
use that technology - I would expect the reaction to be _the exact opposite_
of what ends up happening.

I left a review on GoodReads:
[https://www.goodreads.com/review/show/1553897979](https://www.goodreads.com/review/show/1553897979)

~~~
crdb
I liked this essay on plot holes (and more generally good writing) despite the
all caps and rather long winded style:
[http://birthmoviesdeath.com/2012/10/30/film-crit-hulk-
smash-...](http://birthmoviesdeath.com/2012/10/30/film-crit-hulk-smash-hulk-
vs.-plot-holes-and-movie-logic)

Personally, I found the strength of TBP and DF to be the depth that Liu
achieves with his plots at the highest level, and it's important to take a
step back and not judge him as pure hard SF (as it seems to have been sold to
you, based on your review) but as a writer of literature using SF as his
medium (as might have Heinlein, PKD, or Asimov who is his clear and direct
inspiration).

The science "plot holes", the suspension of disbelief were I think fair play
as a base to deploy his explanation of the Fermi paradox (which is to an
extent the point of the whole series). Like psychohistory in Asimov's
Foundation or Batman's seeming invincibility in Nolan and Ledger's
masterpiece, it helps plot development and the greater ideas about human
nature, politics, information operations and so on that are put forward by the
book.

The analyses of human nature, particularly of bureaucracies and destruction
via inaction (to quote Admiral Rickover, "the person who disclaims
responsibility is correct: by taking this way out he is truly not responsible;
he is irresponsible").

What makes a good book/movie/narrative work of art? To me it is increasingly
about the plot and, to quote FCH, about how long the work can make you think
about it after you're done reading it. It's clearly working since it's been
weeks since I've read the books and I still couldn't resist making the quip
despite the increasing amount of karma it is costing me for being off-topic.

Compared to another famous recent Hugo winner, Rainbows End, I thought Liu's
work was much more enjoyable, because it was technically unpolished but had a
great, interesting, innovative plot (and I'm sure half of the polish went
missing in translation), whilst the latter was technically impeccable if now a
little dated, but had little in the way of plot; the plot was almost a frame
in which Vinge was developing his ideas about wearable tech and information
operations' logical conclusion. It's like Esterhase mysteriously putting on a
bad Hungarian accent in Smiley's People when he was the epitome of the try-
too-hard British arriviste in TTSP - you can forgive them the glitch since the
core of the writing is so exceptional and both Esterhases were fabulous
characters with great depth.

Liu's ability to toy with the reader and take unconventional paths is rather
rare in today's crop of writers. I would draw a parallel there with many of
Charlie Stross' books; the polish is not always there, but he keeps
reinventing himself and (at least for me) each foray into a new genre or
avenue of thought is a success (and a source of great movies and books to
explore).

As a side note, I thought it was one of the few successful depictions of a
truly alien culture (what you call near-Strong-AI?) in SF today (and no, I
didn't think Vinge's FOTD's Hugo winning hive-dogs were truly alien: put human
heads instead, set it in medieval "Ireland-Spain", and you get Game of
Thrones, down to an epic fire battle before the walls of King's Landing).

As a second side note, isn't it fun to draw parallels between TBP and the real
world? How do you, today, as the PLA, deal with the fact the NSA can hear and
read everything except your thoughts when planning defense strategy? Suddenly
the sophons don't seem so alien... I don't like tin foil hats, so I didn't try
too hard to put myself in the Chinese position, but it was definitely an
interesting line of thought.

~~~
pavel_lishin
Yeah, the human nature aspects were what I really loved about it. Liu could
have left out most of the interstellar scifi, and told a story just as good.

I'm not sure if I buy the alien-culture, though. The Trisolarians seemed just
as human as ... humans, especially given their introduction in the titular
video game, and the Sophons barely seem to have a culture at all.

(I also agree about the Tines; I really love them as a species, but I hated
the sequel, because I don't really care about basically pre-tech societies
enough to read long fiction about them - same problem I had with Stephenson's
Baroque Cycle, and the reason I haven't read any of the ASoIF novels.

~~~
crdb
> I'm not sure if I buy the alien-culture, though. The Trisolarians seemed
> just as human as ... humans, especially given their introduction in the
> titular video game, and the Sophons barely seem to have a culture at all.

Did you really think so? I can't remember where DF started, so I'm going to
have to be careful with spoilers but in my view, the "game characters" were
either humans (professor Ye if I remember well), or weak AI game characters
programmed by the Trisolarians in an attempt to map their propaganda to
humans. The game itself is an information operation: it is designed to
cultivate a resistance within humanity and disinform humans psychologically in
order to gain yet another edge over them militarily.

However Trisolarians themselves are a "superior civilisation" which is both
helped and hindered by a particular feature of theirs which we don't have
(related to the Tines, actually) and which becomes the core plot point
enabling most of DF to play out (like the Wall Facer project). Sophons are
just sophisticated communication devices, there to send back information to
Trisolarians so they can better understand, hinder and later destroy Earth;
they are not themselves strong AI (and therefore not a civilisation).

Thus what makes it interesting is the game theoretic aspect of it, and
especially the treatment of information flow. Trisolarians know everything
except the thoughts of humans (and, initially, they also lack the information
that humans are capable of private thought).

It is not what they say (which is purposely adapted to look human) but how
they react to learning bits of information that makes them a fully fleshed out
alien culture (such as learning abstract concepts like deception, then
figuring out the game theory of deception and altering their conversation onto
the ETO accordingly).

The human fifth column goes from being a convenient tool of further
aggression, to a core path to avoiding the one realistic chance humans have
against the invasion. The ability of the Trisolarians to create a high quality
"virtual machine of human minds" within their civilisation capable of such
manipulation makes them a convincing "higher civilisation" (which is what will
make the third book interesting, I bet, especially after the closure brought
by DF).

~~~
pavel_lishin
Ah, ok, I haven't read DF yet. I think what you've given me here is a bit of a
spoiler, but enough to make me actually want to read it.

Is the English translation that's out right now good enough? I've heard very
mixed reviews about it - does it make sense to wait for a possible new
translation, or should I just dive in?

Also, I thought that the Sophons _were_ an AI, and that their actions on Earth
were largely self-controlled - not driven by Trisolarians remotely.

~~~
crdb
I think the rules for the sophons are not entirely clear, because he set them
up as a plot device for a few of the things he needed (FTL, no more science,
omniscience of the enemy) in order to create the special conditions that force
humanity to defend itself by creative thinking and this is also why I didn't
spend too long cross-referencing their viability. Nevertheless I vaguely
remember them being some kind of giant PCB when unfolded in 2D with a fairly
high level of abstraction and autonomy without being strong AI (and therefore
a new civilisation). It's a given in the plot anyway that you don't want to
create a higher civilisation, because of the DF... well, I'm not going to
spoil it, but the Trisolarians have very good reason not to create real
intelligence capable of resetting its goals.

The translation is as good as it's going to get. The main issue is that Liu is
from the PRC and spent most of his life there. It took me years in Asia to
slowly realise how differently the Chinese think from Westerners (hell,
Westerners themselves think very differently just across borders - compare the
worldview of a Brit to that of a Nordic or a Frenchman). If you compare
Strugatsky and Asimov, you also get this huge cultural difference that is
untranslatable because of the large amount of metadata bagage that Russians
would already have coming into Strugatsky's work after growing up in Russia.

The book is "very Chinese", if that makes sense, which I think is what
confuses people (and to me is a feature). A quick intro to what that means
might be watching a few episodes of If You Are The One (非诚勿扰), a slightly
crazy dating show that since the second season has had a government censor
added to the panel to moderate the gold diggers; an Australian TV channel has
started subtitling a bunch of episodes, although I unfortunately could never
find the infamous season 1 ("I'd rather cry at the back of a BMW than smile on
a bicycle"). You both get a sample of PRC normal citizen thinking and a taste
of how the government is setting the tone culturally.

~~~
pavel_lishin
I'd love to get an annotated translation that dives deeper into the
characters' motivations. The translation I had was full of footnotes, but
mostly explaining historical and cultural allusions. But I think the book
would probably be three times longer, and would raise more questions than it
would answer.

Thanks for taking the time to have a nice, long conversation with me about
this!

