• Register
PhysicsOverflow is a next-generation academic platform for physicists and astronomers, including a community peer review system and a postgraduate-level discussion forum analogous to MathOverflow.

Welcome to PhysicsOverflow! PhysicsOverflow is an open platform for community peer review and graduate-level Physics discussion.

Please help promote PhysicsOverflow ads elsewhere if you like it.


Migration to Bielefeld University was successful!

Please vote for this year's PhysicsOverflow ads!

Please do help out in categorising submissions. Submit a paper to PhysicsOverflow!

... see more

Tools for paper authors

Submit paper
Claim Paper Authorship

Tools for SE users

Search User
Reclaim SE Account
Request Account Merger
Nativise imported posts
Claim post (deleted users)
Import SE post

Users whose questions have been imported from Physics Stack Exchange, Theoretical Physics Stack Exchange, or any other Stack Exchange site are kindly requested to reclaim their account and not to register as a new user.

Public \(\beta\) tools

Report a bug with a feature
Request a new functionality
404 page design
Send feedback


(propose a free ad)

Site Statistics

129 submissions , 109 unreviewed
3,743 questions , 1,307 unanswered
4,703 answers , 19,905 comments
1,470 users with positive rep
459 active unimported users
More ...

ATLAS Higgs Interpretation

+ 5 like - 0 dislike

I came across this abstract, and I am curious as to what the ATLAS Team has actually discovered:

Abstract Motivated by the result of the Higgs boson candidates at LEP with a mass of about 115~GeV/c2, the observation given in ATLAS note ATL-COM-PHYS-2010-935 (November 18, 2010) and the publication “Production of isolated Higgs particle at the Large Hadron Collider Physics” (Letters B 683 2010 354-357), we studied the γγ invariant mass distribution over the range of 80 to 150 GeV/c2. With 37.5~pb−1 data from 2010 and 26.0~pb−1 from 2011, we observe a γγ resonance around 115~GeV/c2 with a significance of 4σ. The event rate for this resonance is about thirty times larger than the expectation from Higgs to γγ in the standard model. This channel H→γγ is of great importance because the presence of new heavy particles can enhance strongly both the Higgs production cross section and the decay branching ratio. This large enhancement over the standard model rate implies that the present result is the first definitive observation of physics beyond the standard model. Exciting new physics, including new particles, may be expected to be found in the very near future.

The abstract seems to be from a restricted web site (CERN Log-in required), however I have been able to track down a PDF that seems to be discussing the same phenomenon, however the abstracts are not the same.

Currently, as I understand it, there is a lot of skepticism about the initial Higgs candidate. If this isn't the Higgs, then what part of the standard model is actually being represented? Or is this an entirely new phenomenon?

This post has been migrated from (A51.SE)
asked Sep 17, 2011 in Theoretical Physics by Larian LeQuella (110 points) [ no revision ]
retagged Apr 19, 2014 by dimension10
Most voted comments show all comments
Could you link to the paper?

This post has been migrated from (A51.SE)
@Joe I will try, I had a hard time digging this abstract up (I only re-found it on a blog).

This post has been migrated from (A51.SE)
For instance, the one link I have requires a CERN account... http://cdsweb.cern.ch/record/1346326?

This post has been migrated from (A51.SE)
Have you seen this? http://blogs.plos.org/badphysics/2011/04/22/115gev/ The update at the end makes it look like this is not a real paper.

This post has been migrated from (A51.SE)
@Joe, no I had not! :) Well, that sort of makes my question moot... Darn it.

This post has been migrated from (A51.SE)
Most recent comments show all comments
@Joe please do. :)

This post has been migrated from (A51.SE)
I'm not sure on the idea of discussing theoretical implications unpublished experimental rumors. Meta for this discussion: http://meta.theoreticalphysics.stackexchange.com/questions/57/should-we-allow-discussion-of-unpublished-rumors

This post has been migrated from (A51.SE)

2 Answers

+ 16 like - 0 dislike

The abstract you refer to seems not to actually be a real paper. It excited the blogosphere last april, but from what I can see it is not actually a real result. A CERN spokesperson talking to Nature pretty much quashed the rumour:

ATLAS’ spokeswoman Fabiola Gianotti stops short of disowning the leaked document, but tells Nature signals of the kind reported in the memo show up quite frequently in the course of data analysis and are later falsified after more detailed scrutiny. “Only official ATLAS results, i.e. results that have undergone all the necessary scientific checks by the Collaboration, should be taken seriously,” she says.

A $4\sigma$ result would certainly be something to be taken seriously, though still short of the $5\sigma$ level which is usually taken as a discovery. However, most of the bumps that appear tend to be more around the $2\sigma$ range, and with good reason. These kind of events are very rare, and it can take many years to build up enough recorded events to sufficiently decrease the sampling error. The reason for these kind of bumps often turns out to be sampling error. While naively one would think that a $2\sigma$ event is already a rare event and so should signal something, you have to keep in mind that they are searching across a large range, and so some small bumps are to be expected. These don't necessarily correspond to anything other than sampling error.

This post has been migrated from (A51.SE)
answered Sep 17, 2011 by Joe Fitzsimons (3,555 points) [ no revision ]
+ 11 like - 0 dislike

As Joe said, that was an old rumor that turned out to be nothing. You can see more recent Higgs to two photon results from ATLAS here and CMS here. There are no hints of a signal so far in this channel.

This post has been migrated from (A51.SE)
answered Sep 17, 2011 by Matt Reece (1,630 points) [ no revision ]

Your answer

Please use answers only to (at least partly) answer questions. To comment, discuss, or ask for clarification, leave a comment instead.
To mask links under text, please type your text, highlight it, and click the "link" button. You can then enter your link URL.
Please consult the FAQ for as to how to format your post.
This is the answer box; if you want to write a comment instead, please use the 'add comment' button.
Live preview (may slow down editor)   Preview
Your name to display (optional):
Privacy: Your email address will only be used for sending these notifications.
Anti-spam verification:
If you are a human please identify the position of the character covered by the symbol $\varnothing$ in the following word:
Then drag the red bullet below over the corresponding character of our banner. When you drop it there, the bullet changes to green (on slow internet connections after a few seconds).
To avoid this verification in future, please log in or register.

user contributions licensed under cc by-sa 3.0 with attribution required

Your rights