
Physicists detect whiff of new particle at the Large Hadron Collider - bcaulfield
http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017/04/physicists-detect-whiff-new-particle-large-hadron-collider
======
gus_massa
The article has too few details!!!

It's difficult to google this, but after some tries I found:

[In Spanish] "Crece la anomalía en mesones B de LHCb tras Moriond EW 2017"
[http://francis.naukas.com/2017/04/02/una-
anomalia-a-49-sigma...](http://francis.naukas.com/2017/04/02/una-
anomalia-a-49-sigmas-en-los-mesones-b-tras-moriond-ew-2017/) Autotransation:
[https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=es&tl=en&u=http%3A...](https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=es&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Ffrancis.naukas.com%2F2017%2F04%2F02%2Funa-
anomalia-a-49-sigmas-en-los-mesones-b-tras-moriond-ew-2017%2F)

"B-meson b-s-μ-μ anomaly remains at 4.9 sigma after Moriond"
[http://motls.blogspot.com.ar/2017/03/b-meson-b-s-mu-mu-
anoma...](http://motls.blogspot.com.ar/2017/03/b-meson-b-s-mu-mu-anomaly-
remains-at-49.html)

My takeaway: This is a 4.9 sigma anomaly. And it is a 2.9 sigma anomaly in an
independent experiment in the other corner of the LHC. That's a lot and it
would be very strange that it's caused by a statistical fluke. Anyway, they
still don't have a good theory to explain this experiment. There are a few
candidates theories that propose a new particle, but they don't have enough
data. And usually this theories have a few parameters that can be adjusted to
fit the data, so it's more difficult to distinguish between the real correct
theory and a wrong theory with a astute election of parameters.

~~~
djsumdog
Maybe we're all just in a simulation and are reaching the holes in the
programming?

