Thursday, March 3, 2011

More Problems With SUSY... and MOND Humor.

Two things.  First, back to problems with supersymmetry.   Tommaso Dorigo has posted this very helpful plot that explains what is meant by "The LHC sees no signs of SUSY".  If you squint closely, on top of all the colors you will see a small red line. That red line represents the prediction for what the LHC should see in the data if only the standard model particles existed at the energies being probed. The dotted black line is the prediction if supersymmetry is real at the energies being probed. The black dots with error bars are what was measured.

As you can see, there is thus far no reason to believe anything but the standard model is happening at these energies from this search optimized for the detection of supersymmetry.  It's still pre-mature as only a small portion of the total data is in. Still, if I was hoping for SUSY I would be a little worried at this point that nothing is leaving a hint anywhere in any bin whatsoever!

Question I have For Particle Experimentalists:  (And here is the reason I said that last sentence.)  My experience with cosmology data is, as more data comes in, the confidence regions change a little but not by several sigma in every bin! Take WMAP for example. Has the confidence intervals for the 7 year data changed in every bin by several sigma from the first year data? No way! Changes are made, but the entire power spectrum has not shifted in every bin by several sigma.

Why would I expect particle data to be any different?  Can anyone help me out here?  I mean, if WMAP came back with every bin being inconsistent with a Lambda-CDM universe would 6 more years of data have changed that!

Now, what it may be is that you only need a detection in one bin, not all bins.  Fine, but again, from my cosmology experience, the error bars will shrink and midpoint change a little over time, but very seldomly have I ever seen the midpoint to change so much that what is initially excluded by a sigma or two is now verified at a 5 sigma level!

So any help here by those who know more is appreciated.

Now to MOND.  By now many of you have read Sean Carroll's post debunking MOND. (A theory that attempts to replace dark matter).  Let's just say MOND doesn't work.  So in commemoration I wanted to post the image above reminding ourselves why some gave MOND a chance at all while at the same time reminding ourselves why nobody pays attention to it any more.

For mor information read Sean's post.


  1. JS,

    First of all, you deleted my comment that summarized most of the dialog, because you felt it was critical of you. Well, you as a person, as a spirit, it was not ; however, you took it as if it is a personal attack, and that is after nearly 50 comments worth of dialog!

    I consider your act of deletion as a demonstration of cowardliness of spirit; yet, you did feel compelled to explain your action, and that makes me happy.

    Further you offered me to let you know others comments I find as attack. There are none. They reflect their state of existence at that time, at that instant, and I do not judge them, I only respond.

    Let me close with this thought: before Jesus, there was no Christianity, before Buddha, there was no Middle Way, before Smith there was no LDS; I could go on. The point is to trail blaze, and not be myopic. Religion and science do not mix. Whenever and wherever religion has mixed in human pursuits, it leads to war.

    Faith is unique to each of us, and without faith, we do nothing. It is an act of faith to take a bite in the bread offered by a stranger. So march on, be good in your faith (not indoctrination). All paths lead to bliss, sooner or later.

    If you are brave, you can repost my deleted comment.

    Finally, your this post is more challenging than religion related posts.



To add a link to text:
<a href="URL">Text</a>