The first installment of my homework: here is my suggestion for what is now
lines 31-41 of the 5-page summary. It is longer than what is there now, but
I think these may be the most important lines in the document.
The discovery of the Higgs particle establishes that the masses of
elementary
particles arise dominantly from interactions with the Higgs field that is
turned
on throughout the universe. We now have for the first time in the history of
particle physics a theory all of whose ingredients have been experimentally
verified, and that can be consistently extrapolated to energy scales many
orders
of magnitude above the energy scale of collider experiments. This historic
achievement is not an end, but a beginning, because the standard model of
particle physics leaves many fundamental questions unanswered. In the
tradition
of bold theoretical ideas such as the Higgs mechanism (recognized by this
years'
Nobel prize) particle physicists have proposed compelling ideas that address
these important questions, and that have their crucial test at the TeV
scale:
* The fact that the observed Higgs particle is a scalar particle makes it
very
difficult to understand why its mass scale is smaller than much-larger
fundamental mass scales such as the Planck scale. Addressing this problem
requires significant additional structure: either supersymmetry (an
extension of
Einstein's spacetime symmetry), Higgs compositeness, or extra dimensions of
space. All of these ideas predict a rich spectrum of particles at the TeV
mass scale,
typically including a larger Higgs sector.
* The standard model does not account for the dark matter that makes up
most of
the matter of the universe. A stable particle at the Higgs mass scale with
weak
interactions with ordinary matter (a WIMP) is one of the simplest and
compelling
theories of dark matter. If dark matter is a WIMP it may be possible to
study
dark matter under controlled laboratory conditions in collider experiments.
To summarize: \emph{Compelling ideas about fundamental physics predict new
particles at the TeV energy scale that are potentially accessible to
present and
planned future accelerators. These experiments are the crucial tests of
these ideas.
Furthermore, if such particles are discovered, they can be studied in
detail to
determine their properties, leading to the establishment of new fundamental
laws of
nature.}
The past successes of particle physics clearly call for us to continue and
extend a three-pronged program of research in collider experiments:
First, we must study the Higgs boson itself in as much detail as possible,
searching for signs of a larger Higgs sector and the effects of new heavy
particles.
Second, we must search for small deviations in the standard model
predictions
for the couplings of the Higgs, W, Z, and top quark from new particles.
Finally, we must directly search for new particles with TeV masses that can
address important problems in fundamental physics.
Markus Luty
============================================
Physics Department
University of California, Davis
One Shields Avenue
Davis, CA 95616
Phone: +1 530 554 1280
Skype: markus_luty
On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 1:57 PM, Ashutosh Kotwal <[log in to unmask]>wrote:
> On Oct 10, 2013, at 4:03 PM, "Peskin, Michael E." <
> [log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> > minutes of the EF phone meeting 10/8
> >
> > attending: Chip, Michael, Sally, Daniel, LianTao, Ashutosh, Cecilia,
> Reinhard, Markus, Andy White
> >
> > There are many items in these minutes that all of you need act on more
> or less immediately. Please read these minutes carefully. We summary the
> action items at the end.
> >
> > Our reports are overdue. We would like to send our reports to the
> Snowmass conveners on Tuesday, October 15.
> >
> > All line numbers refer to the 10-3 versions sent out last Friday.
> >
> > 1. From the group on the phone, and from the emails that we have
> received, you seem to be happy with the reports that we put together except
> for some specific points discussed below. Michael emphasized that, if you
> are not happy, you must speak up now. This is best done by sending email
> to snowmass-ef. Urgently, please.
> >
> > 2. Many of the people on the phone were uncomfortable with the language
> on likes 40-41 of the short report: "These puzzles imply that new
> particles with masses of the order of 1 TeV which resolve these questions
> will be found -- and will be accessible to existing and planned
> accelerators." They felt that "imply" was too strong and that the
> implication of 1 TeV rather than, say, 5 TeV was made in this sentence.
>
>
> what about replacing
>
> "…masses of the order of 1 TeV"
>
> by
>
> "...masses below about 10 TeV"
>
> just as an example, ATLAS studies have shown sensitivity to KK gluons ->
> ttbar in the 5 TeV range
>
> ------
>
> as far as the word "imply" goes, it seems to me that "imply" has a
> built-in caveat that it is an implication on the basis of a certain logic.
> In this case, the logic is that nature will avoid too much fine tuning. The
> 10 TeV number would make the fine tuning about 0.01%
> and the logic is that this is very uncomfortable amount of fine tuning
>
> So, I think we are protected in the legalistic sense if we do use the
> word "imply"
>
> Also, to me, the scale of how "strong" the language is, is no longer set
> by the "strength" of "there must be some new physics to explain massive
> gauge bosons…" which worked very well for SSC and LHC motivation. I don't
> think we have to normalize to that any more. I think we have to normalize
> to the "strongest" language we could use for ANY new physics, in the
> post-Higgs discovery, post-theta13, post-Planck…etc… world we live in now.
>
> regards,
> Ashutosh
> ########################################################################
> Use REPLY-ALL to reply to list
>
> To unsubscribe from the SNOWMASS-EF list, click the following link:
> https://listserv.slac.stanford.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=SNOWMASS-EF&A=1
>
########################################################################
Use REPLY-ALL to reply to list
To unsubscribe from the SNOWMASS-EF list, click the following link:
https://listserv.slac.stanford.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=SNOWMASS-EF&A=1
