3 ms·
"The muon, like its lighter sibling the electron, acts like a tiny magnet. The parameter known as the "g factor" indicates how strong the magnet is and the rate
by omgJustTest 3y ago
"The muon, like its lighter sibling the electron, acts like a tiny magnet. The parameter known as the "g factor" indicates how strong the magnet is and the rate of its gyration in an externally applied magnetic field. It is this rate of gyration that is indirectly measured in the Muon g − 2 experiment.
The value of g is slightly larger than 2, hence the name of the experiment. This difference from 2 (the "anomalous" part) is caused by higher-order contributions from quantum field theory. In measuring g − 2 with high precision and comparing its value to the theoretical prediction, physicists will discover whether the experiment agrees with theory. Any deviation would point to as yet undiscovered subatomic particles that exist in nature.[4] "
From Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muon_g-2 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muon_g-2
Standard model g factor should be 2.00233183620(86): https://physics.aps.org/articles/v16/139 https://physics.aps.org/articles/v16/139
TLDR: Standard model says the ratio measured should be about 2 for g, ie g-2 > 0 would indicate contributions from quantum field theory, which are yet to be well understood and could indicate there are more particles responsible for the excess.
- maxnoe 3y agoThe standard model *is a Quantum field theory". Making a Standard Model vs. QFT thua statement doesn't make sense. The problem is the lack of an analytical solution and the different systematic errors that come from different numerical approaches and assumptions made. According to the article, there are multiple standard model theory predictions using different approaches which are in tension.
- omgJustTest 3y agoI am not offering one versus the other. I am saying that g-2 > 0 contributions come from QFT, which is true and that people inspect the g-2 quantity for evidence of beyond standard model particles. Literally just rephrasing the wikipedia/phys org article, as a TLDR would claim to do.