3 ms·
You nailed it. In addition, they're absolutely correct, some subset of particle researchers were wish-casting for SUSY stuff. In addition, there's a significa
by refulgentis 2y ago
You nailed it.
In addition, they're absolutely correct, some subset of particle researchers were wish-casting for SUSY stuff.
In addition, there's a significant substantive difference between "$X was defined and built for discovering $Y" and "some subset of $X hoped for proof of their theory $Y via $Z being discovered" -- there was also some subset that hoped for proof of string theory, or innumerable other things.
In general they're right and know their stuff if they're able to have this detailed of a take, but the actual claim "The word "expected" is doing a lot of work.", is doing a lot of work. And I was there. In a graduate physics lab with multiple faculty members on the LHC before it opened, including a big SUSY fan who thought that'd be a bank shot on a bank shot outcome, maybe. Hoped for by some? Yes. Expected by a majority? Absolutely not.
- MadnessASAP 2y agoNeat! Thanks for sharing your insight and fancy words :)
- T-A 2y agoExperimenters always were more skeptical; I hypothesized asking phenomenologists for a reason. I like Adam Falkowski's description of what it was like in [1] (about the end of dedicated SUSY working groups at CERN): the existence of SUSY was almost a fact for a bulk of researchers working on the topic. This certainly was reflected in hiring practices, and you had a large group of top researchers whose entire publication list was tied to supersymmetry [1] https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/supersymmetrys-long-fall-from-grace/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/supersymmetrys-lo...
- refulgentis 2y agoI don't disagree but you choosing contrarianism to show you're clever and know a lot here (which worked!) made it sound like CERN was expecting a SUSY particle or whatever (which it wasn't)
- T-A 2y ago> you choosing contrarianism ? > to show you're clever and know a lot ?!? I contribute to discussions when I have the time and think I have something relevant to say. HN is hardly the right place to show off about physics, and trying to do so anonymously would be particularly pointless. > made it sound like CERN was expecting a SUSY particle That's not what I wrote. My point was explicitly about expectations on the theory side. Perplexed.