dukwon

17 ms·

31.
by dukwon 6y ago
I guess the logic of the headline was that LHCb is one of the "machines" at the LHC. Unfortunately in LHC jargon, "the machine" is the collider itself rather than the detectors.
32.
by dukwon 6y ago
Also the University of Zürich. The Cambridge involvement is just because someone from Imperial moved there.
33.
by dukwon 6y ago
Unlike that 750 GeV lump, there are other observables in this case which build a consistent picture. Some fits to Wilson coefficients in b->sll were at almost 7σ even before this new result.
34.
by dukwon 6y ago
Testing different models is done in the analysis of the data, not in running the experiment differently. The "experiment" (colliding protons together) has been repeated quadrillions of times at the LHC. But there are only a few pa
35.
by dukwon 6y ago
The US's contributions to CERN are equipment and services rather than money, but indeed they are a big contributor. They are certainly the largest participating country in the LHC by number of scientists.
36.
by dukwon 6y ago
LHCb has not seen lepton flavour violation, and neither has anyone else outside of neutrino oscillations. LHCb, Belle and BaBar have however seen hints of lepton flavour non-universality.
37.
by dukwon 6y ago
It's more like hedging their bets. The Chinese proposals (CEPC + SppC) are simultaneously underwhelming in terms of performance specs and over-ambitious in terms of timescale. There's also always a chance that they will never mate
38.
The design considerations for a new tunnel for a post-LHC collider at CERN(cerncourier.com)
2 points by dukwon 7y ago|0 comments
39.
by dukwon 7y ago
Qualify for what? There isn't some sort of objective arbitrator who decides whether Microsoft offers a discount to particular organisations. It's really up to them. For the record, I also did my PhD at CERN, but they just provided
40.
by dukwon 7y ago
> Universities have thousands of students that do not generate any revenue. The standard licensing model per person or per computer totally breaks down in that case, asking for a huge bill based only on the sheer amount of users. There a
41.
by dukwon 7y ago
> You seem to be making an argument based on what Microsoft says Well, yeah, I'm repeating what I remember them saying. I'm definitely not making my own argument, nor am I particularly willing to speculate about any ulterior mo
42.
by dukwon 7y ago
Basically yes: https://icannwiki.org/Brand_TLD I agree with the move away from .ch, since it's an international organisation, but .int would have been the correct choice IMO
43.
by dukwon 7y ago
I believe Microsoft's main argument is that CERN doesn't teach or award degrees. Last time this was posted I saw someone say it's also due to them making a little bit of money licensing stuff to industry [1], but universities
44.
by dukwon 7y ago
There's a mix of linux, windows and mac OS machines, depending on the use-case and/or user-preference. This won't change.
45.
by dukwon 7y ago
> I suspect this is specifically targeting Windows. It's not: it's things like Active Directory, Skype4B, Office, Exchange etc. Desktop OS's aren't covered by MAlt.
46.
by dukwon 8y ago
This is a great result and a real milestone in particle physics. CERN is really ablaze with the news (seriously, there was a fire: https://i.imgur.com/i8nkPMR.jpg ) Stay tuned for more high-profile LHCb results at Moriond to
47.
by dukwon 8y ago
The Standard Model explained it in the early 1970s
48.
by dukwon 8y ago
> The guy is a physicist, he is way more qualified than any sociologist to deal with statistics. I laughed at this for a solid minute. Statistics is something that theoretical particle physicists frequently and flagrantly ignore, to the
49.
by dukwon 8y ago
I always thought mfb worked on ATLAS
50.
by dukwon 8y ago
I have no idea what point you're trying to make with that quote. Companies and universities in different countries pay different salaries. That is outside the control of CERN.
51.
by dukwon 8y ago
The EC partly funded the FCC design study ( http://www.eurocircol.eu/ ), but I'd be amazed if the EU made a significant contribution to actually building it. Particularly as it would mean 22+ member states paying twice.
52.
by dukwon 8y ago
Gotcha, thanks.
53.
by dukwon 8y ago
But it's good enough for ANTARES/KM3NET to see Cherenkov light, which I believe requires a dielectric medium.
54.
by dukwon 8y ago
Is sea water unsuitable?
55.
by dukwon 8y ago
> For this detection channel, there isn't too much special about Antarctica What about for the Askaryan channel?
56.
by dukwon 8y ago
A Lorentz transformation can be written as a rotation matrix using hyperbolic trig functions instead of regular ones. This machine works by having grooves in the shape of hyperbolic lines that the blocks follow.
57.
by dukwon 8y ago
> There was a major upgrade in 2013-2015 which doubled the energy (from 3.5 TeV per beam to 6.5 TeV per beam) Yeah, that was the splice consolidation. > but the luminosity was increased in 2016 and 2017 as well. From what I know, that
58.
by dukwon 8y ago
There has only been one upgrade to the LHC by my count (splice consolidation in LS1).
59.
by dukwon 8y ago
> within the current precision of the measurement The error bars are ±20%, so there's quite a lot of wiggle room for new physics.
60.
by dukwon 8y ago
Yep. I meant we don't use it for track reconstruction.

More ›