4 ms·

> There are many ways to extend the standard model and it would be nice to have additional constraints on the extensions (which would come from observing behavi

> There are many ways to extend the standard model and it would be nice to have additional constraints on the extensions (which would come from observing behavior not described by the standard model). For any experts reading this: what are plausible-looking extensions of the standard model which can probably be challenged/"proved" by current generation accelerators (in particular the LHC) and would lead to interesting extensions of the standard model? As far as I am aware, the LHC could e.g. find no sign of lots of variants of supersymmetry, which was a plausible candiate for this in the past: > https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/supersymmetry-fails-test-forcing-physics-seek-new-idea/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/supersymmetry-fai... > https://www.quantamagazine.org/complications-in-physics-lend-support-to-multiverse-hypothesis-20130524/ https://www.quantamagazine.org/complications-in-physics-lend...

cozzyd 8y ago
I'm no theorist, so this is perhaps my jaded view, but right now my impression is that the phase space of theories is too large for someone to have a single prediction. The situation seems more like the LHC experiments are looking for ANY potential discrepancies with the standard model and then theorists will happily write up some reason for why it has to be that way. I went to a conference a few years ago where the LHC experiments announced that previous hints of a discrepancy with the SM evaporated with more statistics, which resulted in a whole session of theorists having to cancel / completely redo their talks.
- the8472 8y ago
  > The situation seems more like the LHC experiments are looking for ANY potential discrepancies with the standard model and then theorists will happily write up some reason for why it has to be that way. Until recently they were mostly looking for specific deviations predicted by extensions. They only recently announced that they're now going for a broader search.
- whatshisface 8y ago
  >theorists will happily write up some reason for why it has to be that way. They'll write down a model that describes it, which is all theorists' job to begin with.

cozzyd 8y ago

I'm no theorist, so this is perhaps my jaded view, but right now my impression is that the phase space of theories is too large for someone to have a single prediction. The situation seems more like the LHC experiments are looking for ANY potential discrepancies with the standard model and then theorists will happily write up some reason for why it has to be that way. I went to a conference a few years ago where the LHC experiments announced that previous hints of a discrepancy with the SM evaporated with more statistics, which resulted in a whole session of theorists having to cancel / completely redo their talks.

the8472 8y ago
> The situation seems more like the LHC experiments are looking for ANY potential discrepancies with the standard model and then theorists will happily write up some reason for why it has to be that way. Until recently they were mostly looking for specific deviations predicted by extensions. They only recently announced that they're now going for a broader search.
whatshisface 8y ago
>theorists will happily write up some reason for why it has to be that way. They'll write down a model that describes it, which is all theorists' job to begin with.