Arcadian Functor

occasional meanderings in physics' brave new world

My Photo
Name:
Location: New Zealand

Marni D. Sheppeard

Sunday, July 19, 2009

Fairy Update

After Tommaso Dorigo's July 14 report on the W/top ellipse, our friend Lubos Mottle calculated that the MSSM was now 13 times more likely than the Standard Model. In a more recent post, Tommaso points out that the MSSM ellipse used in this computation unfortunately appears to lie in the excluded zone of $M_{H} < 114$ GeV. In other words, is there any reason to have much confidence in either scenario?

11 Comments:

Blogger Matti Pitkanen said...

This is what also I was wondering and why neither Tommaso nor Lubos mentioned this.

Personally I have mixed feelings concerning Higgs. Even with my own limited understanding it is clear that the deduction of Higgs mass value in standard model involves averaging over data giving rather different mass values.

In TGD Universe Higgs like particle is possible although it does not have any obvious counterpart as classical field. p-Adic thermodynamics allows several mass values coming as half octaves. According to what data one uses 132 GeV or 93 GeV is the preferred mass value. Only the latter value is consistent with the ellipse exprssing probabilistic restrictions on top quark and W boson masses.

On the other hand, according to my recent understanding about massivation in TGD framework, Higgs is not needed for massivation. So...

July 20, 2009 2:37 AM  
Blogger Daniel de Fran├ža MTd2 said...

Tommaso did comment on the 114GeV threshold on the comments section...

July 20, 2009 4:27 AM  
Blogger nige said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

July 20, 2009 8:56 AM  
Anonymous Rhys said...

*shakes head slowly at Nige*

Sad

July 20, 2009 8:10 PM  
Blogger nige said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

July 20, 2009 9:58 PM  
Blogger Kea said...

Nigel, your point of view is of course welcome here, but could you PLEASE PLEASE keep your posts short. You can always link to your OWN blog.

July 21, 2009 5:13 AM  
Anonymous Rhys said...

Kea, I had a quick look at the archives of this blog, but couldn't work out where you explain how electroweak symmetry might be broken in such a way as to avoid a Higgs boson (either fundamental or composite). Could you point me to an appropriate post, or explain in a few words?

July 22, 2009 12:56 AM  
Blogger Kea said...

Rhys, symmetry is not foundational in our approach to the standard model. Symmetry is emergent, just as spacetime degrees of freedom are. No need for Higgs bosons.

July 22, 2009 1:18 AM  
Blogger Kea said...

Nigel, go blabber on YOUR OWN BLOG.

July 24, 2009 5:34 AM  
Blogger Kea said...

Nigel, I have no qualms about deleting comments roughly equivalent to the statement that you know better than everyone else. Grow up.

July 24, 2009 7:17 AM  
Blogger nige said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

July 24, 2009 8:47 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home