The Higgs boson mass is much lower than the Planck scale, despite quantum corrections that should push it much higher. What do you think is the most reasonable explanation for why it remains so small? Is it natural symmetry, new physics like supersymmetry, compositeness, or an anthropic selection in a multiverse?

Do physicists reject anthropic selection because it feels like giving up on finding a real mechanism, or are there stronger scientific reasons for dismissing it?

Hey, we are a group of high school students interested in proposing an experiment for the Beam Line for Schools competition (BL4S) competition by CERN. We basically have to propose an experiment that we can perform through the Beamline present at CERN. We've just studied introductory nuclear physics, how do you think we should prepare to come up with an innovative, original experiment? any suggestions introductory books or material we should go through? tips will be appreciated.

Am learning MadGraph and just realized that at NLO it does not show any detector options. As I said I am learning MadGraph so I might be missing something here, and wanted to confirm this. Is there any other way to add detector effects to my simulation at NLO or do I just use the Pythia output from MadGraph and try to use standalone Delphes?

Thanks for the time!

Black hole is it possible for collisions say meteors or other objects of mass to colide with the excretion disk at high enough velocity to create high energy particles maybe even dark matter

Hi everyone,

My name is Nikhil Kumar, and I'm an M.Tech research student at IIT Mandi. I'm passionate about exploring the intersection of astronomy and machine learning, but I'm feeling a bit overwhelmed about where to begin.

My Background: I completed B.Sc. in physics and Masters

in computer application with GATE and NET in computer science and JEST and JAM in physics. However, my knowledge of both machine learning and astronomy is limited.

My Goals:

I'm eager to learn and contribute to research in this exciting field. I'm looking for guidance on how to get started, including: Finding suitable datasets for astronomy research. (e.g., image datasets from telescopes, astronomical catalogs) Learning resources for both machine learning and its applications in astronomy. (e.g., online courses, research papers, tutorials) Potential research projects that are feasible for a beginner. (e.g., exoplanet detection, galaxy classification, supernova prediction)

I'm also interested in finding potential collaborators, whether they are fellow students, researchers, or experienced professionals in the field.

I am trying to recreate the results from this paper : https://arxiv.org/pdf/2206.14395

I was able to re derive the analytical results, but I am having some problem in numerical analysis.

Basically I want calculate the self interaction cross section in cm^2/g

I have attached you the code which I have used, But i am not able to match the numerical results given in the paper. I suspect that I might have missed very simple [I am very dumb :( ]

I have attached the numerical analysis screenshot from the paper (I am trying to recreate numerical value for sigma_t in that paper)

Also I am first scholar for my supervisor, so I have no seniors to help me

Kindly point out the mistake I made.

https://preview.redd.it/4l2ef4k4u5ee1.png?width=885&format=png&auto=webp&s=b1a5c9c7cd3b4a36fbb95dc3b05cc0a210c9718b

https://preview.redd.it/zs8gb8u8t5ee1.png?width=784&format=png&auto=webp&s=a309a498b349b66bb90817147f09da425ffba945

I have one at my school and I wanna come up with a little fun experiment so I can write a mock paper about it. Does anyone have ideas on what the experiment can be about? I was thinking about muon time dilation but I am not so sure how that plays into muon detections. Thanks

I was watching Dr. Don's new video today and he described how a neutrino interacts with Argon and knocks off electrons which are swept away in an electric field and the patterns (spatially and temporally?) are studied to improve the understanding of neutrinos.

I was wondering if there are particular ways that information is visualized? I can imagine a time and space map of the electrons dislodged. Is that important? What other information can currently be derived from the data set?

Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y0BF-dMgZRk

cc: u/jazzwhiz

I’m not a physicist, not even a student, only immensely interested in and passionate about everything that’s connected to the little particles :) For me, the reason particles in particular (pun intended) are fascinating to me is probably because some kind of core personality trait in my brain must have activated and formed when I played Half-Life for the first time as an 11 year old.

Since then, it has been one of my favourite things about the universe. Everything is so small but so important! Literally fundamental! There is something poetic about the elementary particles and the four fundamental forces being governed by some of them. Invisible little things that determine the laws of physics and keep the universe in balance, holding together the fabric of space and time itself. It’s the mystery, the inconcievably small scale, and yet their immense role in everything.

So what makes you love particle physics in particular? What about it draws you in? If you’re a student or a physicist, what made you choose this field before any others?

Hello, i am calculating something and came across the moment problem (hausdorff type). Does anyone have any idea on how to tackle it?

I have the problem that i don't know infinitely many moments and thus need a kind of 'perturbative' way of describing the solution (maybe asymptotic solutions also are enough), but in general something where i have a rather good control over the errors I commit when truncating at the n'th moment.

I would be pleased with any input!

Ps: To clarify what my problem is: X^n = int_0^1 x^n d \mu is the quantity that is measured (up to some n, with respective errors) and i want to calculate int_0^1 d\mu . (The 0th moment, yes). Maybe i am going at it from a wrong perspective so even if you think my way of solving it is silly, please tell me.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-024-08262-7

Anyone have a take on this? Is it purely of mathematical interest or do you think it could yield any fruit beyond that?

Edit: note these are not just anyons

Basically the title. For theoretical particle physics I've read that Cambridge, Oxford and Perimeter Institute have the best masters programs. But which masters are the best if I intend to get into phenomenology/experimental particle physics? Thanks.

Since the volume elements and the matrix element are Lorentz invariant (as well as p1•p2), if we change the frame of p1,p2, we can subsequently change the frame in which the integral is performed (by performing an identical frame change on p3,p4)—shouldn’t the resulting expression be Lorentz invariant? A few things I saw online used |v2-v1| which isn’t Lorentz invariant, but this expression should be, correct?

I'm a huge fan of particle science and particles in general and I was wondering if we are done with finding new ones. We confirmed the Higgs Boson in 2012, and hypothesize about the axion and graviton, but the experiments needed to find them may be out of reach (at least for the time being). Supersymmetry also looks to be largely incorrect.

Will we ever find, an out of left field new particle, are are we done?

Soo I am an engineering student and a physics enthusiast, could you suggest me books I could read related to physics.

I’m planning to finish my degree this spring and apply to graduate school next year. During that year, I’d like to do something to get a bit more hands on experience with either experimental or theoretical particle physics. I know several places offer summer programs but my situation seems a bit more niche and am unable to find much. If relevant, I have pretty good programming skills and am currently working on a (mostly computational) project about sterile neutrinos. If anyone knows any programs that would be good to look into I would greatly appreciate any help!

In SUSY, each fermion of spin X has a boson superpartner of spin X-(1/2), but they don't correspond to force carriers, just other matter particles right? Otherwise it introduces a lot more forces than the ones we have now?

I will be attending a particle physics conference next month. While my knowledge of particle physics is quite basic, the conference includes lectures on particle accelerators and detectors, which I find exciting. I never expected to be accepted to participate, but now that I am, I want to make the most of this opportunity. Where should I begin learning about particle physics to prepare effectively for the conference? TIA!

Edit:

The conference program includes a comprehensive set of lectures and a student presentation session. There will be four series of lectures, each covering key aspects of particle physics: theory, experiments, particle accelerators, and detectors. Each series comprises four 90-minute lectures, which include discussions.

On the last day of the event, there will be a student presentation session where participants are divided into four groups, each focusing on one of the main topics: Particle Physics Theory, Particle Physics Experiment, Particle Detectors, and Particle Accelerators. Each group will have 30 minutes for their presentation, including 20 minutes to present their assignment and 10 minutes for discussion. The assignments will be given by the lecturers, and participants will have time to prepare!

I've seen this for the past few weeks or so about the particles (technically I think it was a quasiparticle) having mass in one direction only but nothing about that being used for a reactionless drive. With that whole EM drive BS from before, I remember the claim that if particles had more mass in one direction than the other then that could make for a reactionless drive. But in all this talk for the past couple weeks I have seen no mention of that regarding this discovery. Is there a reason it wouldn't apply in this situation because it's a quasi particle?

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2024/12/241210163512.htm

Heyo I have had some basic scattering theory, but the book (Sakurai) was really bad at it. Can you guys recommend me a textbook or other kind of ressource for properly learning scattering theory?

I want it because I want to write a proper section on scattering in my thesis, which is otherwise VERY experimental focused.