###
Nothing new about Higgs but 3 sigma indications of M_{89} kaon

The news about Moriond conference (for details see for the posting of Phil Gibbs) did not bring anything really new concerning the situation with Higgs. The two-photon discrepancy is still there although the production rate is now about 1.6 times higher than predicted. The error bars are however getting narrower so that there are excellent reasons to hope/fear that unexpected kind of new physics is trying to tell about itself. Also the masses deduced from gamma pair and Z pair decay widths are slightly different.

The TGD-based explanation would be in terms of M_{89} hadron physics, a fractal copy of ordinary hadron physics with 512 times higher overall mass scale. If the pion of this new physics has mass not too far from 125 GeV its decays to gamma and Z pairs would affect the observed decay rates of Higgs to gamma and Z pairs if one assumes just standard model. Fermi anomaly suggests mass of about 135 GeV for the pion of M_{89} hadron physics. The observations of RHIC and those from proton-heavy nucleus collisions - correlated pairs of charged particles moving in same or opposite directions- could be understood in terms of decays of M_{89} mesons behaving like hadronic strings in low energies in the relevant energy scale.

Lubos tells in his recent posting about 3 sigma excess for new charged and neutral particles with mass around 420 GeV. They would be produced as pairs of charged and neutral particle. M_{89} physics based explanation would be in terms of kaons of M_{89} hadron physics. The naive scaling by the ratio r=m(π^{+}_{107})/m(K^{+}_{107}) of masses of ordinary pion and kaon predicts that the M_{89} pion should have mass m(π^{+}_{89})= r× 420 GeV. This would give m(π^{+}_{89})=119 GeV not too far from 125 GeV to affect the apparent decay rates of Higgs to gamma and Z pairs since its width as strongly interacting particle decaying to ordinary quarks and gluons is expected to be large. This mass however deviates from the 135 GeV mass suggested by Fermi data by 18 per cent.

**Update**: The CMS data from Higgs came from Moriond (see for instance this and this) and tell that photon pair production rate is .78+/- .27 from the predicted rate. The mean value would be less than half of that found by ATLAS! The groups use different detectors so that the large difference could be due to statistical fluctuations. Unless it is due to the different assumptions in the data analysis! I believe that Higgs like state is here and might well behave just as the standard model tells it must behave. As an innocent outsider I however cannot avoid making innocent questions. Could the anomalies be there too? What these anomalies could tell about the new physics that was expected to emerge at TeV energies? And how much pre-existing beliefs affect the analysis in which one must know precisely what one is searching for ("Standard model explains everything!", "Maybe there is new physics of expected kind, say SUSY, can be searched for", "Maybe even new physics outside the mainstream is worth searching for")? It is a pity that we have the next opportunity to answer these questions only after 2015.

## 5 Comments:

http://news.sciencemag.org/sciencenow/2013/03/physicists-discover-a-whopping.html

http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/roots/

http://phys.org/news/2013-03-lhc-team-instance-d-mesons-oscillating.html

http://sci.esa.int/science-e/www/object/index.cfm?fobjectid=51551

"If the fabric of the cosmos is not isotropic on scales so large that extend beyond the horizon of the 'patch' of the Universe that we can access with observations, its global geometry would be rather complex: this could force bundles of light rays into highly intricate paths where they would be significantly focussed. As CMB photons have travelled across the Universe for most of its history, they might have experienced this effect, resulting in the anomalous pattern of the CMB observed across the sky"

topological light rays?

One can imagine all kinds of effects. For instance, photons from astrophysical objects could propagate along topological light rays defining in this manner analogs of laser beams and the attenuation caused by scattering from CMB radiation could be reduced. Many-sheetedness could cause interesting effects too.

Light-cone allows slicing by hyperbolic spaces H^3 with varying values of cosmic time (light cone proper time defined as distance from the tip). H^3 allows infinite number of lattice like structures defining tesselations just as Euclidian space E^3 allows lattices consisting of rhombohedra, cube is the simplest one of them). Any finitely generated infinite discrete subgroup Gamma of Lorentz group SO(1,3) generates such a lattice defined by the orbit of Gamma and tesselation defined by H^3/Gamma.

For E^3 lattices distance is quantized. For H^3 lattices distance is replaced with quantizer velocity - more precisely Lorentz boost used to obtain the position of the point of H^3. In cosmology quantizer Lorentz boost would correspond to red shift in discrete direction. This would mean the analog of diffraction pattern for given proper time distance a.

This could induce interesting cosmological effects - at least if one is ready to take seriously the idea about quantum coherence in astrophysical scales.

a) Zero energy ontology has CD as its basic building block (intersection of future and past directed light cone). The positions for the upper tips of CDs with respect to the lower tip might be at lattie points defined by Gamma. Note that the position cannot vary continuously since in this case the positions of both upper and lower tips would define separate 4-momentum.

b) The positions of astrophysical objects in cosmic scales might prefer the lattice points. The

honeycomb structure in 10^8 ly scale with galaxies at the boundaries of the cells might correspond to a tessellation in H^3.

c) For a CD associated with a system generating radiation the radiation might prefer directions which correspond to H^3 lattice. This would give rise to something analogous to diffraction pattern!

Post a Comment

<< Home