Thursday, April 04, 2013

AMS results as a support for lepto-hadron physics and M89 hadron physics?

The results of AMS-02 experiment are published. There is paper, live blog from CERN, and article in Economist. There is also press release from CERN. Also Lubos has written a summary from the point of view of SUSY fan who wants to see the findings as support for the discovery of SUSY neutralino. More balanced and somewhat skeptic representations paying attention to the hypeish features of the announcement come from Jester and Matt Strassler.

The abstract of the article is here.

A precision measurement by the Alpha Magnetic Spectrometer on the International Space Station of the positron fraction in primary cosmic rays in the energy range from 0.5 to 350 GeV based on 6.8 × 106 positron and electron events is presented. The very accurate data show that the positron fraction is steadily increasing from 10 to 250 GeV, but, from 20 to 250 GeV, the slope decreases by an order of magnitude. The positron fraction spectrum shows no fine structure, and the positron to electron ratio shows no observable anisotropy. Together, these features show the existence of new physical phenomena.

New physics has been observed. The findings confirm the earlier findings of Fermi and Pamela also showing positron excess. The experimenters do not give data above 350 GeV but say that the flux of electrons does not change. The press release states that the data are consistent with dark matter particles annihilating to positron pairs. For instance, the flux of the particles is same everywhere, which does not favor supernovae in galactic plane as source of electron positron pairs. According to the press release, AMS should be able to tell within forthcoming months whether dark matter or something else is in question.

About the neutralino interpretation

Lubos trusts on his mirror neurons and deduces from the body language of Samuel Ting that the flux drops abruptly above 350 GeV as neutralino interpretation predicts.

  1. The neutralino interpretation assumes that the positron pairs result in the decays χχ→ e+e- and predicts a sharp cutoff above mass scale of neutralino due to the reduction of the cosmic temperature below critical value determined by the mass of the neutralino leading to the annilation of neutralinos (fermions). Not all neutralinos annhilate and this would give to dark matter as a cosmic relic.


  2. According the press release and according to the figure 5 of the article the positron fraction settles to small but constant fraction before 350 GeV. The dream of Lubos is that abrupt cutoff takes place above 350 GeV: about this region we did not learn anything yet because the measurement uncertainties are too high. From Lubos's dream I would intuit that neutralino mass should be of the order 350 GeV. The electron/positron flux is fitted as a sum of diffuse background proportional to Ce+/-Ee+/- and a contribution resulting from decays and parametrized as Cs Es exp(-E/Es) - same for electron and positron. The cutoff Es of order Es= 700 GeV: error bars are rather large. The factor exp(-E/Es) does not vary too much in the range 1-350 GeV so that the exponential is probably motivated by the possible interpretation as neutralino for which sharp cutoff is expected. The mass of neutralino should be of order Es. The positron fraction represented in figure 5 of the article seems to approach constant near 350 GeV. The weight of the common source is only 1 per cent of the diffuse electron flux.


  3. Lubos notices that in neutralino scenario also a new interaction mediated by a particle with mass of order 1 GeV is needed to explain the decrease of the positron fraction above 1 GeV. It would seem that Lubos is trying to force right leg to the shoe of the left leg. Maybe one could understand the low end of the spectrum solely in terms of particle or particles with mass of order 10 GeV and the upper end of the spectrum in terms of particles of M89 hadron physics.


  4. Jester lists several counter arguments against the interpretation of the observations in terms of dark matter. The needed annihilation cross section must be two orders of magnitude higher than required for the dark matter to be a cosmic thermal relic -this holds true also for the neutralino scenario. Second problem is that the annihilation of neutralinos to quark pairs predicts also antiproton excess, which has not been observed. One must tailor the couplings so that they favor leptons. It has been also argued that pulsars could explain the positron excess: the recent finding is that the flux is same from all directions.

What could TGD interpretation be?

What can one say about the results in TGD framework? The first idea that comes to mind is that electron-positron pairs result from single particle annihilations but it seems that this option is not realistic. Fermion-antifermion annihilations are more natural and brings in strong analogy with neutralinos, which would give rise to dark matter as a remnant remaining after annihilation in cold dark matter scenario. An analogous scenario is obtained in TGD Universe by replacing neutralinos with baryons of some dark and scaled up variant of ordinary hadron physics of leptohadron physics.

  1. The positron fraction increases from 10 to 250 GeV with its slope decreasing between 20 GeV and 250 GeV by an order of magnitude. The observations suggest to my innocent mind a scale of order 10 GeV. The TGD inspired model for already forgotten CDF anomaly discussed in the chapter The recent status of leptohadron hypothesis of "p-Adic length Scale Hypothesis and Dark Matter Hierarchy" suggests the existence of τ pions with masses coming as three first octaves of the basic mass which is two times the mass of τ lepton. I have proposed interpretation of the positron excess ob served by Fermi and Pamela now confirmed by AMS in terms τ pions. The predicted mass of the three octaves of τ pion would be 3.6 GeV, 7.2 GeV, and 14.4 GeV. Could the octaves of τ pion explain the increase of the production rate up to 20 GeV and its gradual drop after that?

    There is a severe objection against this idea. The energy distribution of τ pions dictates the width of the energy interval in which their decays contribute to the electron spectrum and what suggests itself is that decays of τ pions yield almost monochromatic peaks rather than the observed continuum extending to high energies. Any resonance should yield similar distribution and this suggests that the electron positron pairs must be produced in the two particle annihilations of some particles.

    The annihilations of colored τ leptons and their antiparticles could however contribute to the spectrum of electron-positron pairs. Also the leptonic analogs of baryons could annihilate with their antiparticles to lepton pairs. For these two options the dark particles would be fermions as also neutralino is.


  2. Could colored τ leptons and - hadrons and their muonic and electronic counterparts be really dark matter? ‎ The particle might be dark matter in TGD sense - that is particle with a non-standard value of effective Planck constant hbareff coming as integer multiple of hbar. The existence of colored excitations of leptons and pion like states with mass in good approximation twice the mass of lepton leads to difficulties with the decay widths of W and Z unless the colored leptons have non-standard value of effective Planck constant and therefore lack direct couplings to W and Z.

    A more general hypothesis would be that the hadrons of all scaled up variant of QCD like world (leptohadron physics and scaled variants of hadron physics) predicted by TGD correspond to non-standard value of effective Planck constant and dark matter in TGD sense. This would mean that these new scaled up hadron physics would couple only very weakly to the standard physics.

  3. At the high energy end of the spectrum M89 hadron physics would be naturally involved and also now the hadrons could be dark in TGD sense. Es might be interpreted as temperature, which is in the energy range assigned to M89 hadron physics and correspond to a mass of some M89 hadron. Fermions are natural candidates and the annihilations nucleons and anti-nucleons of M89 hadron physics could contribute to the spectrum of leptons at higher energies. The direct scaling of M89 proton mass gives mass of order 500 GeV and this value is consistent with the limits 480 GeV and 1760 GeV for Es.

  4. There could be also a relation to the observations of Fermi suggesting an annihilation of some bosonic states to gamma pairs with gamma energy around 135 GeV could be interpreted in terms of annihilations of a M89 pion with mass of 270 GeV (maybe octave of leptopion with mass 135 Gev in turn octave of pion with mass 67.5 GeV).

How to resolve the objections against dark matter as thermal relic?

The basic objection against dark matter scenarios is that dark matter particles as thermal relics annihilate also to quark pairs so that proton excess should be also observed. TGD based vision could also circumvent this objection.

  1. Cosmic evolution would be a sequence of phase transitions between hadron physics characterized by Mersenne primes. The lowest Mersenne primes are M2=3, M3=7, M5=31, M_7=127, M13, M17, M19, M31, M61, M89, and M107 assignable to the ordinary hadron physics are involved but it might be possible to have also M127(electrohadrons). There are also Gaussian Mersenne primes MG,n= (1+i)n-1. Those labelled by n=151,157,163,167 and spanning p-adic length scales in biologically relevant length scales 10 nm,..., 2.5 μm.

  2. The key point is that at given period characterised by M_n the hadrons characterized by larger Mersenne primes would be absent. In particular, before the period of the ordinary hadrons only M89 hadrons were present and decayed to ordinary hadrons. Therefore no antiproton excess is expected - at least by the mechanism producing it in the standard dark matter scenarios where all dark and ordinary particles are present simultaneously.

  3. The second objection relates to the cross section, which must be two orders of magnitude larger than required by the cold dark matter scenarios. I am unable to say anything definite about this. The fact that both M89 hadrons and colored leptons are strongly interacting would increase corresponding annilation cross section and leptohadrons could later decay to ordinary leptons.

Connection with strange cosmic ray events and strange observations at RHIC and LHC

The model could also allow to understand the strange ultrahigh energy cosmic ray events (Centauros,etc) suggesting a formation of a blob ("hot spot" of exotic matter in atmosphere and decaying to ordinary hadrons. In the center of mass system of atmospheric particle and incoming cosmic ray cm energies are indeed of order M89 mass scale. As suggested, these hot spots would be hot in p-adic sense and correspond to p-adic temperature assignable to M89. Also the strange events observed already at RHIC in heavy ion collisions and later at LHC in proton-heavy ion collisions, and in conflict with the perturbative QCD predicting the formation of quark gluon plasma could be understood as a formation of M89 hot spots (see this). The basic finding was that there were strong correlations: two particles tended to move either parallel or antiparallel, as if they had resulted in a decay of string like objects. The AdS/CFT inspired explanation was in terms of higher dimensional blackholes. TGD explanation is more prosaic: string like objects (color magnetic flux tubes) dominating the low energy limit of M89 hadron physics were created.

The question whether M89 hadrons, or their cosmic relics are dark in TGD sense remains open. In the case of colored variants of the ordinary leptons the decay widths of weak bosons force this. It however seems that a coherent story about the physics in TGD Universe is developing as more data emerges. This story is bound to remain to qualitative description: quantitative approach would require a lot of collective theoretical work.

Also CDMS claims dark matter

Also CDMS (Cryogenic Dark Matter Search) reports new indications for dark matter particles: see the Nature blog article Another dark matter sign from a Minnesota mine. Experimenters have observed 3 events with expected background of .7 events and claim that the mass of the dark matter particle is 8.6 GeV. This mass is much lighter than what has been expected: something above 350 GeV was suggested as explanation of the AMS observations. The low mass is however consistent with the identification as first octave of tau-pion with mass about 7.2 GeV for which already forgotten CDF anomaly provided support for years ago (as explained above p-adic length scale hypothesis allows octaves of the basic mass for leptopion which is in good approximation 2 times the mass of the charged lepton, that is 3.6 GeV). The particle must be dark in TGD sense, in other words it must have non-standard value of effective Planck constant. Otherwise it would contribute to the decay widths of W and Z.

15 Comments:

At 3:57 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Amazing, I got a dim fleeting view of various scaled up copies.. quite interesting, but as you say, completely qualitative...

On an unrelated note,

http://discovermagazine.com/2013/april/22-20-things-you-didnt-know-about-coffee#.UV9UruD8s6L

Seems a lot like the pot calling the kettle black to me.

--Stephen

 
At 10:13 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I must say, I much prefer reading your PDFs to thinking about the vast majority of trite and shallow content available on the internet. It is a shame that your work is ignore or not funded.. if I am ever successful at amassing a fortune I would fund it myself.

 
At 10:58 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg21829115.700-internal-compass-points-cells-towards-injury.html
--Me (Stephen)

 
At 10:27 AM, Blogger Hamed said...

Dear Matti,

If there is any misunderstanding please say.

One can fix two partonic 2-surface and the space of all light-like 3-surfaces connecting them makes quantum TGD.

I imagine for simplicity there are a lot of ropes that we fix two ends of them at two points. The paths of these ropes are in correspondence with the paths of light like 3-surfaces. But I think there is not one to one, because one can say there are a lot of light like 3-surfaces with the same path but different induced metric

Boundary of the ropes are corresponded to X^3 and interior of the ropes are corresponded to X^4(X^3). The boundary of slice of each rope orthogonal to direction of it’s path is corresponded to partonic 2-surface.

There are two continuations for X^4(X^3): In Minkowskian direction and in Euclidean direction.
In the example of ropes, X^4(X^3) is a continuation In Minkowskian direction.

 
At 8:16 AM, Blogger Stephen said...

http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2013/04/infrared-background-glow-of-the-universe-mystery-solved.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+TheDailyGalaxyNewsFromPlanetEarthBeyond+%28The+Daily+Galaxy+--Great+Discoveries+Channel%3A+Sci%2C+Space%2C+Tech.%29

 
At 11:58 AM, Blogger Stephen said...

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn23367-brain-imaging-spots-our-abstract-choices-before-we-do.html

again 10 seconds...

 
At 4:39 AM, Anonymous matpitka@luukku.com said...

The time scale was in the experiments of Libet only a fraction of second. Now it is ten seconds! Support for the TGD view about time is emerging steadily! I wonder, when colleagues finally wake up and get interested. It it is high time for this.

Matti

 
At 4:50 AM, Anonymous matpitka@luukku.com said...


To Stephen:

About infrared background flow.

It would be interesting to know what the astrohysicists can say about time and distance for the generation of the flow.

There are unidentified lines not assignable to molecular transitions in visible and infrared. Maybe this mystery flow might have same origin. The "dropping" of various particle from smaller to larger space-time sheets predicts an entire spectrum of this kind of exotic lines with levels labelled by p-adic primes and atomic/molecular masses (increments of zero point kinetic energies E_p= hbar^2/2ML_p^2. L_p \proto 2^k, k integer. For electron k=151 (L_p corresponds to cell membrane thickness) would correspond to .5 eV, metabolic energy quantum. For proton energy would be much smaller.

This kind of IR glow would not have origin in distance cosmological past but from much later era.

 
At 5:03 AM, Anonymous matpitka@luukku.com said...


To Hamed,

[Hamed] One can fix two partonic 2-surface and the space of all light-like 3-surfaces connecting them makes quantum TGD.

[MP] Yes: roughly.

[Hamed] I imagine for simplicity there are a lot of ropes that we fix two ends of them at two points. The paths of these ropes are in correspondence with the paths of light like 3-surfaces. But I think there is not one to one, because one can say there are a lot of light like 3-surfaces with the same path but different induced metric

[MP] From what you say below I would identify the ropes as space-time surfaces X^4(X^3) and thus paths of *space-like* - not light-like ! - 3-surfaces beginning at either end of CD and ending to the other end of CD. Usually I talk about paths of partonic 2-surfaces which correspond to the 3-D regions at which the signature of the induced metric for X^4(X^3) changes. Strong form of holography allows also to talk about paths of space-like 3-surfaces.


[Hamed] Boundary of the ropes are corresponded to X^3 and interior of the ropes are corresponded to X^4(X^3). The boundary of slice of each rope orthogonal to direction of it’s path is corresponded to partonic 2-surface. There are two continuations for X^4(X^3): In Minkowskian direction and in Euclidean direction. In the example of ropes, X^4(X^3) is a continuation In Minkowskian direction.

[MP] Yes this is true. Once you have fixed X^4(X^3) which can have both Euclidian and Minkowskian regions, you have fixed its induced metric uniquely from the expression h^k= h^k(x^alpha) for imbedding space coordinate as functions of space-time coordinates and from the metric h_kl(h) of H.

 
At 11:51 AM, Blogger Stephen said...

p-adic stuff.. as a number theorist the Bernoulli numbers are near and dear to my heart :)

http://chromotopy.org/?p=1044

 
At 1:30 AM, Blogger Hamed said...

Dear Matti,

Some basic thing in my understanding is wrong?

[MP] I would identify the ropes as space-time surfaces X^4(X^3) and thus paths of *space-like* - not light-like ! - 3-surfaces beginning at either end of CD and ending to the other end of CD

You say space like 3-surface beginning at either end of CD and ending to the other end of CD.
in my imagination light like 3-surface has the same property. Also one can deform light like 3-surface in CP2 direction to make space like 3-surface or vice versa.


I have 2 properties of space like 3-surfaces: the one is “space like 3- surface is in the intersections of X^4(X_l^3) with CD*CP2” and another is “space like 3- surface beginning at either end of CD and ending to the other end of CD”

As I think first one and the second one are not equivalent!
The first one refers to space like 3-surfaces localized at lower or upper boundary of CD, but the second one refers to something between two boundaries of CD.

 
At 3:03 AM, Anonymous matpitka@luukku.com said...


[MP] I would identify the ropes as space-time surfaces X^4(X^3) and thus paths of *space-like* - not light-like ! - 3-surfaces beginning at either end of CD and ending to the other end of CD

[Hamed] You say space like 3-surface beginning at either end of CD and ending to the other end of CD.
in my imagination light like 3-surface has the same property. Also one can deform light like 3-surface in CP2 direction to make space like 3-surface or vice versa.

[MP] This is true. Holography allows to use both metaphors.

[Hamed] I have 2 properties of space like 3-surfaces: the one is “space like 3- surface is in the intersections of X^4(X_l^3) with CD*CP2” and another is “space like 3- surface beginning at either end of CD and ending to the other end of CD”

As I think first one and the second one are not equivalent!

[MP] You are of course right. See below.

[Hamed] The first one refers to space like 3-surfaces localized at lower or upper boundary of CD, but the second one refers to something between two boundaries of CD.

[MP] Not quite. In a lazy mood space-like 3-surface can refer to the disjoint union of space-like 3-surfaces assignable to two ends of CDxCP_2. I use this kind of short hand also for partonic 2-surfaces associated with two ends of CDxCP_2 when I feel that it does not course confusions. For topologists this is everyday practice but might be very confusing otherwise since we tend to think surface always as a connected entity.

Recall that it was the non-determinism of Kahler action which originally motivated ZEO. Single space-like 3-surface at time=constant snaphot of imbedding space is not enough. Also in p-adic context p-adic pseudoconstants imply the same. These two non-determinisms might be actually equivalent.

One has quantum superposition of 3-surfaces formed by *pairs* of space-like 3-surfaces at the ends of CD. Since CDs form a hierarchy one can also introduce CDs within CDs and zero energy states within zero energy states.

Quantum field theorists would speak of quantum fluctuations around classical field configuration stationary under variations of the action.

In TGD I speak about preferred extremals for which strong form of determinism fails and path integral is replaced by summation and functional integrations over the space-like 3-surfaces only (and by strong form of general coordinate invariance and holography over 2-D partonic surfaces plus 4-D tangent space data at them).

Further warning: I use CD and CDxCP_2 interchangeably (CD just for laziness).

 
At 12:05 PM, Blogger Ulla said...

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/04/13/shadow-biosphere-theory-gaining-scientific-support/

Some scientists believe we may be sharing the planet with ‘weird’ lifeforms that are so different from our own they’re invisible to us. Cleland, a philosopher based at the university’s astrobiology centre, calls this ethereal dimension the shadow biosphere. “The idea is straightforward,” she says. “On Earth we may be co-inhabiting with microbial lifeforms that have a completely different biochemistry from the one shared by life as we currently know it.”

Also superorganisms...

 
At 8:06 PM, Blogger Hamed said...

Dear Matti,

For a given X^3 one can assign X^4(X^3) and GCI acts on it. In really there are a lot of X^4 going through X^3, but only preferred extremal of kahler action has the property of GCI. GCI acts on the preferred extremal means if we act Diff4 on this surface, it has the same kahler action as before. In another form it has diff4 degenerate.

is it correct?

 
At 9:17 PM, Anonymous matpitka@luukku.com said...

Yes. X^4 is not changed, only its coordinatization so that Kahler action as Diff^4 invariant remains unchanged.

One must of course assume that Diff^4 does not affect ends: in other worlds reduces to Diff^3 acting at endo of X^4 at the boundaries of CD.

Diff^4 invariance as such looks trivial but its implications are really strong. Especially when its strong form implying strong form of holography is assumed.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home