/sci/ - Science & Math

>>10603913
No, it is the super symmetry and string theory people that are cranks, expensive cranks.

>>10603913
the quest for more shekels also resemblance certain people which I cannot remember now

>>10603913
if you look at the publicity for FCC or HE-LHC coming from CERN, they’re not hyping SUSY any more. you’ll see a lot more emphasis on higgs physics. same is true, even moreso, of ILC.

nima wrote a good article on this topic
https://cerncourier.com/in-it-for-the-long-haul/

don’t believe “reee i lost my job now i hate physics” sabine

>>10604075
I believe most people at CERN don't believe SUSY is a valid theory anymore. It's doesn't matter how pretty the maths is. If the Universe says no then they can't argue. Must suck for all those researchers who have spent their entire career working on a theory that's completly wrong. So you'll see no more mention of SUSY but a lot more mentions of Dark Matter in the proposals.

The CERN upgrades aren't really asking for that much new money (certainly not $100b), it's simply to keep the existing funding from all member countries for another 25+ years.

>a-at least we found Higgs boson. Please, give me some grants

>>10604157
Particle accelerators have always been built to try and discover new physics. The fact the LHC hasn't discovered anything except for proving the Higg boson is interesting in itself.

>>10603913
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_UB9kkmwR5w

>>10604173
Sounds like cope desu

>>10604173
>The fact the LHC hasn't discovered anything except for proving the Higg boson is interesting in itself.
Pentaquarks.

Meanwhile chad LIGO finds gravity waves as soon as it's turned on.

>>10604196
That's not new physics. Tetra- and Penta- quarks were already predicted by the Standard Model and specifically QCD. They had just never been observed before.

The only new fundamental physics in the last 30 years that can't be explained by the Standard Model is Neutrino mass and Dark Matter and neither of those have been discovered by particle accelerators. You could maybe argue some CP violations too.

>>10604223
The decay of b mesons.

>>10604223
Isn't the whole point of the HLC to observe shit that's been theorized half a century ago? It's just e-stroking, but I was never under the impression that they claimed it was anything else.

>>10603913

Physics is just poor man's modulated Math.

>>10604213
You made my day!! :)

>>10604089
>>10604035

You retards do realize that supersymmetry is considered very likely true by by every competent physicist, and LHC changed nothing on this fact? Of course you dont.

The question is at what energy do supersymmetric particles appear. It may be right around the corner or even somewhere around planck scale.

>>10603913
If you want to research high energy physics, then building bigger particle accelerators is the only way. Without LHC successor, the field will stagnate.

>>10604688
afaik those rare B meson decays seen so far are still inside standard model predictions.

>>10604692
most particle physicists before the LHC was turned on were expecting to see new physics and not just the Higgs. SUSY or extra dimensions being the most common (at the time).

>>10604702
the LHC *did* change that fact. that's because all the SUSY theories predicted the lower mass SUSY sparticles would absolutely be within the energy range of the LHC. the fact they've seen nothing has pretty much ruled all those theories out. if SUSY is true it's no longer the simple beautiful theory they were expecting. that's because those still supporting it are having to explain why it doesn't match with observations by adding wilder and crazier adjustments that most scientist no longer agree with.

>>10604702
>and LHC changed nothing on this fact?
The hell it didn't. Its constrained the lower end of SUSY, which is where they were hoping to find them starting to appear.
Theres still higher energy levels to probe but if its too high energy then it doesn't help to recconcile the asymmetry of SM.
When they first ran LHC they were hoping for a lighter higgs and a bunch of SUSY particles. Instead they got a heavy higgs and fuck else.

A BIGGER PARTICLE COLLIDER IS A WASTE OF MONEY. ENERGY FROM LIGHTENING AND HARVESTED ENERGY HAS LIKE WHAT 1 TRILLI COLLISIONS PER SECOND. YOU'RE BETTER OFF CREATING AN ENERGY MOLESTERING DEVICE; if you want new matter try a machine that strategicly breaks down, a inner sphere, a med sphere and an outer rotating unit. I predict overload of energy and massive amounts of ripping from rotation might create a big enough collision to produce new matter.

>>10604716
kek
> The accelerator is money well spent: the results of our research is: that this size accelerator is not powerful enough to find the particle

Any money invested in this is wasted money. Finding out the truth about the subatomic world will never have any relevance to society.

>>10604737
Investing in pure research has always generating side technologies that have benefited society. The internet as you know it today wouldn't exist without CERN. It generates thousands of jobs in the tech and engineering industry that are required to build and design new technologies it requires to run. Most of the superconducting technologies in use today were invented for particle accelerators. All those magnets in MRI's that save tens of thousands of lives a year is kind of relevant to society. It goes on ...

>>10604726
kek, schizo joins the anti-FCC team. looking real good for your side, Hosstardfelders