DOCSLIB.ORG

By Tienzen (Jeh-Tween) Gong

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
By Tienzen (Jeh-Tween) Gong By Tienzen (Jeh-Tween) Gong 1 Nature’s Manifesto --- Nature vs Bullcraps Copyright © 2017 By Tienzen (Jeh-Tween) Gong Published by Prebabel Institute & Society of TOE Contact address: PO Box 4794 Diamond Bar, CA 91765 USA Web addresses: http://www.prebabel.info/ http://www.prequark.org/ http://prebabel.blogspot.com/ https://tienzengong.wordpress.com/ http://tienzen.livejournal.com/ https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/natures-manifesto-physics-jeh-tween-gong https://medium.com/@Tienzen/final-toe-theory-of-everything-9b12ec7c0c9f#.kmd8qqhhi 2 Table of Content Preface P 5 Introduction P 14 Volume one: Physics-TOE Chapter one: #how2CalculateAlpha P 29 Chapter two: #how2CalculatePlanckCMBdata P 38 Chapter three: Where is the beef? P 55 Chapter four: the First Principle P 71 Chapter five: the Expansion and Acceleration of the universe P 96 Chapter six: #how2CalculateCosmologyConstant P 102 Chapter seven: Why not SUSY (s-particle) P 108 Chapter eight: Quantum Gravity --- from here to eternity P 123 Chapter nine: New Science Epistemology P 157 Chapter ten: the String-M theory Bullcrap P 215 Chapter eleven: Higgs Bullcrap P 238 Chapter twelve: Nature’s manifesto on physics P 272 Chapter thirteen: Nowhere to run! P 294 Volume two: Life-TOE Chapter fourteen: about intelligence P 312 Chapter fifteen: Nature’s manifesto on Life --- the seeds (bases) of life P 328 Chapter sixteen: the Darwinism bullcrap P 347 Chapter seventeen: Deaths of two G0ds --- the origin of Life P 358 Chapter eighteen: The Human Intelligent Brain P 366 Chapter nineteen: the sexevolution P 379 Volume three: math-TOE Chapter twenty: the internal structure of number ZERO P 391 Chapter twenty-one: giving rise to physics laws P 397 Chapter twenty-two: Unification of physics and mathematics P 406 3 Chapter twenty-three: Fermat’s last theorem P 416 Chapter twenty-four: law of creation P 425 Chapter twenty-five: the Final Total TOE P 438 Volume four: Social-science-TOE Chapter twenty-six: A new Economics Theory P 468 Chapter twenty-seven: Politics in TOE P 479 Chapter twenty-eight: Linguistics in TOE P 549 4 Preface In 1984, I published a book “Super Unified Theory; ISBN 9780916713010”. 5 6 7 ALL its predictions have been verified. One, {the uniform expansion at EVERY point = acceleration of the Universe} See (Chapter 5 of SUT --- The future of the universe, page 42). But others received Nobel for this in 2011. See {Nobel Prize 2011, Accelerating expansion of the universe was predicted in 1984, http://prebabel.blogspot.com/2011/10/nobel-prize-2011- accelerating-expansion.html } Two, {a vacuum boson should have mass = 125.45 (+/- 1/2) Gev.} 8 But, Peter Higgs got Nobel-physics on this in 2013. Three, G-theory is centered on ‘Cyclic Universes (C-multiverse)’, and this is supported now with observation data: The Planck 2015 and Planck 2013 observations, the results by the Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP), Atacama Cosmology Tele-scope (ACT) and South Pole Telescope (SPT). Yet, someone is now claiming the credit. 9 Four, predicted {Planck CMB data 1: (dark energy = 69.2; dark matter = 25.8; and visible matter = 4.82)} and the dark flow {= 9%}. This calculation is widely known in the physics community. It was posted at over 10 prominent physics blogs. See Chapter two. But, this is ignored by the mainstream physics community. Five, calculated Alpha: This calculation is posted at over 10 prominent physics blogs. But this is not recognized by the mainstream physics community at this point. Is a verified scientific fact (or easily verifiable fact) still not a truth until it is *ordained* by the current paradigm? How can {137.0359… not equal to 137.0359…}? 10 Six, calculated Cosmology Constant (see Chapter six): Again, this is denied by the mainstream physics community. 11 Obviously, the mainstream physics community is not interested in searching for truth. When it (mainstream physics) is wrong, it simply tries to weasel in and out to protect its interests, and this is Bullcrap (not just being wrong). Thus, describing truths is mostly wasting of time if it is not in the interests of the mainstream paradigm. So, in addition to describing the Nature’s secrets, the key point of this book is talking about the ‘bullcraps’ in the modern science. Pointing out the bullcraps of the mainstream, this book will obviously not be welcome by the current generation. Indeed, this book is not for my contemporary but is for marking the history, as a witness for humanity. The Science Bullcraps Written on November 1, 2015 (See http://blog.talkingphilosophy.com/?p=9017#comment-1383933 ) Is “reality” merely socially constructed: the beliefs, meanings and values available within a culture? Science is a human activity, and it is of course totally socially-biased construction. However, the human bias can never out do the Nature IF the final goal of science is to describe Nature. Religion is definitely 100% culturally biased while the science is socially biased with a self- correction mechanism, making paradigm change when evidences no longer can be explained away by biased ideology: however, the essence of SCIENCE is socially biased, paradigm- centered and biased. I am giving two solid examples here. Example one: George Johnson (columnist of The New York Times) wrote an article (June 22, 2015): {Humankind’s Existentially Lucky Numbers, which states: “Alpha’s value seems no more predictable than digits randomly spit out by a lottery machine: 0.0072973525698. One of the greatest mysteries of physics, the physicist Richard Feynman called it, ‘a magic number that comes to us with no understanding by man.”} Yet, the precise CALCULATION for Alpha was available online for 20 long years (at many prominent physics blogs), see https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/totally-blind-deaf- googlefacebookblogosphere-era-jeh-tween-gong . Socially, the community self-lying can kill 12 this fact easily. Yet, how can {137.0359… not equal to 137.0359…?}. This social bullcrap is just a bullcrap. Example two: Peter Higgs received Nobel of physics in 2013. But, three years after the discovery of the so called ‘Higgs boson’, the Higgs mechanism is not verified. In fact, the newly discovered boson was predicted over 30 years ago in a copyrighted book, and this fact is recently informed to the whole world (CERN, FermiLab, New York Times, etc.) via blogs and twitter. See https://storify.com/Tienzen/thenotifications-on-the-higgs-nonsense-vv Now, this fact was known by over one million street walking persons. These two facts show that SCIENCE is a totally socially biased construction. Yet, the human power is no match to the Nature’s truth. 13 Introduction Religion is all about the self-definition about the ‘meaning’ of one’s life. So, any kind of ‘nonsense’ can be ordinated as golden truth for the meaning of one’s life. And this self- definition is all legit. On the other hand, science claims to be the study of Nature, not any kind of self-definition. So, any science statement which does not agree with Nature is simply WRONG. While ‘nonsense’ is legit in religion, it is bullcrap in science. Of course, science is a human endeavor, prone for errors. Yet, science should have a self-correcting mechanism. Making mistakes in science is normal. Thus, lying to one’s self and dishonesty can be legit behaviors in religions but will definitely be ‘bullcrap’ in science. Today, the modern science has lost this self-correcting (self-introspection) ability. The mission of this book is not talking about the wrongs in science but points out all the ‘bullcraps’ in science. “Bullcrap” is precisely defined with the following attributes in this book: One, lying to one’s self Two, dishonesty Three, uneducable ignorance/the cowardice to hide the dishonesty away. And, I will show at least one SOLID example for each category in this introduction. First, lying to one’s self: On June 22, 2015, George Johnson (from The New York Times) wrote an article “Humankind’s Existentially Lucky Numbers”, which states that the Alpha is not calculable, see, http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/23/science/humankinds-existentially-lucky- numbers.html?_r=0 ). On June 24, 2015, I wrote an article {Totally blind and deaf in this Google/Facebook/blogosphere era, https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/totally-blind-deaf- googlefacebookblogosphere-era-jeh-tween-gong } which shows a formula, check and verifiable by every 8th grade kid. 14 Second, total dishonesty: Then, the major Higgs decaying channel (should account for 60%) is not verified thus far (on December 31, 2016). How can it be Higgs if its major decaying channel is not confirmed? 15 16 On July 4th, 2012, LHC discovered a new boson, and Peter Higgs won the Nobel-physics for it in 2013. I wrote an article {Higgs Nonsense: enough is enough; https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/before-lhc-run-2-begins-enough-jeh-tween-gong } on July 4, 2015. I also tweeted to CERN directly on August 28, 2015, with hundreds retweet and likes. Third, uneducable ignorance: 17 Every number can always be reached via some numerological formula. But reaching a set (more than two) numbers with a single numerological formula will be difficult, if it is not all impossible. THIS universe is defined with a set STRUCTURE parameters. One, Vacuum (wrongly named as Higgs) boson’s mass: 125.09 +/- 0.24 Gev Two, dark energy/dark mass/visible mass distribution Three, Neff = ??? Four, Hubble constant (Ho) Five, baryongenesis Six, dark flow??? Seven, nature constants (Alpha, Cosmology constant, etc.) The Planck CMB data provides, at least, three STRUCTURE parameters. One, dark energy/dark mass/visible mass: (DE=69.22 % 、D=25.90 % 、V=4.86 %) Two, Neff = 3.04 Three, Hubble constant (Ho) = 66.93 ± 0.62 km s−1 Mpc−1 (measurements from the ancient relic) Here is the magic numerological formula: This numerological formula covers 4 of the 7 STRUCTURE parameters DIRECTLY: {dark energy/dark mass/visible mass distribution; Neff = 3; Hubble constant (Ho)/ dark flow (See http://vixra.freeforums.org/the-dark-flow-t823.html ) and baryongenesis}.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • PDF) Submittals Are Preferred) and Information Particle and Astroparticle Physics As Well As Accelerator Physics
    CERNNovember/December 2019 cerncourier.com COURIERReporting on international high-energy physics WELCOME CERN Courier – digital edition Welcome to the digital edition of the November/December 2019 issue of CERN Courier. The Extremely Large Telescope, adorning the cover of this issue, is due to EXTREMELY record first light in 2025 and will outperform existing telescopes by orders of magnitude. It is one of several large instruments to look forward to in the decade ahead, which will also see the start of high-luminosity LHC operations. LARGE TELESCOPE As the 2020s gets under way, the Courier will be reviewing the LHC’s 10-year physics programme so far, as well as charting progress in other domains. In the meantime, enjoy news of KATRIN’s first limit on the neutrino mass (p7), a summary of the recently published European strategy briefing book (p8), the genesis of a hadron-therapy centre in Southeast Europe (p9), and dispatches from the most interesting recent conferences (pp19—23). CLIC’s status and future (p41), the abstract world of gauge–gravity duality (p44), France’s particle-physics origins (p37) and CERN’s open days (p32) are other highlights from this last issue of the decade. Enjoy! To sign up to the new-issue alert, please visit: http://comms.iop.org/k/iop/cerncourier To subscribe to the magazine, please visit: https://cerncourier.com/p/about-cern-courier KATRIN weighs in on neutrinos Maldacena on the gauge–gravity dual FPGAs that speak your language EDITOR: MATTHEW CHALMERS, CERN DIGITAL EDITION CREATED BY IOP PUBLISHING CCNovDec19_Cover_v1.indd 1 29/10/2019 15:41 CERNCOURIER www.
    [Show full text]
  • Jet Structures in Higgs and New Physics Searches
    Jet structures in Higgs and New Physics searches Gavin P. Salam LPTHE, UPMC Paris 6 & CNRS Focus Week on QCD in connection with BSM study at LHC IPMU, Tokyo, 10 November 2009 Part based on work with Jon Butterworth, Adam Davison (UCL), John Ellis (CERN), Tilman Plehn (Heidelberg), Are Raklev (Stockholm) Mathieu Rubin (LPTHE) and Michael Spannowsky (Oregon) LHC searches for hadronically-decaying new particles are challenging: ◮ Huge QCD backgrounds ◮ Limited mass resolution (detector & QCD effects) ◮ Complications like combinatorics, e.g. too many jets ◮ Especially true for EW-scale new particles New strategy emerging in past 2 years: boosted particle searches ◮ Heavy particles reveal themselves as jet substructure ◮ E.g. top/W/H from decay of high mass particle ◮ Or directly Higgs (etc.) production at high pt This talk ◮ 70% on one major search channel: pp HV with H bb¯ → → Butterworth, Davison, Rubin & GPS ’09 ◮ 30% on other applications of these ideas many groups, including Butterworth, Ellis, Raklev & GPS ’09; Plehn, GPS & Spannowsky ’09 LHC searches for hadronically-decaying new particles are challenging: ◮ Huge QCD backgrounds ◮ Limited mass resolution (detector & QCD effects) ◮ Complications like combinatorics, e.g. too many jets ◮ Especially true for EW-scale new particles New strategy emerging in past 2 years: boosted particle searches ◮ Heavy particles reveal themselves as jet substructure ◮ E.g. top/W/H from decay of high mass particle ◮ Or directly Higgs (etc.) production at high pt This talk ◮ 70% on one major search channel: pp HV with H bb¯ → → Butterworth, Davison, Rubin & GPS ’09 ◮ 30% on other applications of these ideas many groups, including Butterworth, Ellis, Raklev & GPS ’09; Plehn, GPS & Spannowsky ’09 LHC searches for hadronically-decaying new particles are challenging: ◮ Huge QCD backgrounds ◮ Limited mass resolution (detector & QCD effects) ◮ Complications like combinatorics, e.g.
    [Show full text]
  • QCD at the Large Hadron Collider
    QCD at the Large Hadron Collider Jon Butterworth SLAC Summer Institute SLAC August 2018 Outline • Total cross section and parton densities • The soft stuff • Jet production • Jet substructure • Heavy Flavour production • Measuring the coupling • Quark and gluon matter • Future prospects Aug 2018 JMB: QCD@LHC SSI 2 Outline • Total cross section and parton densities • The soft stuff • Jet production • Jet substructure • Heavy Flavour production • Measuring the coupling • Quark and gluon matter • Future prospects Aug 2018 JMB: QCD@LHC SSI 3 Modelling the Underlying Underlying the Event Modelling Aug 2018 JMB: QCD@LHC SSI 4 Modelling the Underlying Underlying the Event Modelling Aug 2018 JMB: QCD@LHC SSI 5 To the TeV scale and beyond… Pic from Sherpa/F.Krauss Aug 2018 JMB: QCD@LHC SSI 6 Measuring multiparton scattering ATLAS: arXiv:1301.6872 Aug 2018 JMB: QCD@LHC SSI 7 Measuring multiparton scattering CMS: arXiv:1312.5729 Aug 2018 JMB: QCD@LHC SSI 8 So what about jets then? Aug 2018 JMB: QCD@LHC SSI 9 ‘Hard’ QCD • When quarks and gluons make a break for it… Jets! Aug 2018 JMB: QCD@LHC SSI 10 ‘Hard’ QCD • When quarks and gluons make a break for it… Jets! Aug 2018 JMB: QCD@LHC SSI 11 ‘Hard’ QCD • When quarks and gluons make a break for it… Jets! Aug 2018 JMB: QCD@LHC SSI 12 What is a Jet? • Protons are made up of quarks and gluons. • Quarks and gluons are coloured and confined – we only ever see hadrons. • A jet of hadrons is the signature of a quark or gluon in the final state.
    [Show full text]
  • A-Level Physics Transition Work Summer 2021
    A-level Physics Transition Work Summer 2021 Welcome to A-level Physics! Congratulations on choosing the best A-level subject! The purpose of this work is to revise key concepts from GCSE so that you are as ready as possible for A-level Physics in September. Please complete this work on separate sheets of paper and bring it with you to your first Physics lesson in September. We expect to see all three tasks attempted and self-marked. You should expect to find some of the tasks hard. If you are stuck with any of this work, please feel free to contact Mr. Smith ([email protected]) for a hint. There are three tasks. You should spend 1½ to 2 hours on each one. Complete as many of the questions as you can in this time. If you don’t get to the end of the questions, that is fine as long as you have made the effort. Task 1 Energy Task 2 Electric circuits Task 3 Resultant force All the answers are in the back, so you can check your work yourself. (If you think you have spotted a mistake in the answers, please let us know using the email address above!) Other resources to help you prepare… GCSE revision guides - use these to revise key knowledge. The first topics you will study are electricity (AQA P2) and forces and motion (AQA P5), so these are the best sections to focus on. Buy the CGP books ‘Head Start to A-level Physics’ (tinyurl.com/ycboqamn) and ‘Essential Maths Skills for A-level Physics’ (tinyurl.com/y9grnrag).
    [Show full text]
  • Diss. Eth No. 26674 SEARCHES for SUPERSYMMETRY in the FULLY
    diss. eth no. 26674 SEARCHES FOR SUPERSYMMETRY IN THE FULLY HADRONIC AND HIGGS TO DIPHOTON FINAL STATES A thesis submitted to attain the degree of doctor of sciences of eth zurich (Dr. sc. ETH Zurich) presented by myriam schönenberger M.Sc.Physics, ETH Zurich born on 9 April 1990 citizen of Mosnang SG CERN-THESIS-2020-090 06/03/2020 accepted on the recommendation of Prof. Dr. R. Wallny, examiner Prof. Dr. G. Dissertori, co-examiner 2020 Searches for physics beyond the Standard Model (SM) are a main focus of the physics program at the Large Hadron Collider at CERN. I present in this thesis two searches for supersymmetry (SUSY), using data collected with the Compact Muon Solenoid detector. The first search is a broad range search for SUSY in the tails of the stransverse mass distribution MT2. Data collected in the year 2016 corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 35.9 fb−1 are used to obtain data driven estimates of the Z νν, lost ! leptons and QCD multijet backgrounds. No sign of SUSY has been found. Upper limits on the production cross section of simplified models of SUSY are set. Gluino masses up to 2 TeV are excluded for a massless lightest supersymmetric particle (LSP). Squark masses up to 1 TeV(1:6 TeV) for one (four) light squark type(s) for a massless LSP are excluded. The second search explores strong and electroweak SUSY production through the final state of a Higgs boson decaying to a photon pair analyzing 77.5 fb−1 of integrated luminosity collected in 2016 and 2017.
    [Show full text]
  • Interpreting LHC Results
    (Re)Interpreting LHC results David Yallup 16th MCnet Meeting Karlsruhe 1 Reinterpretation of ATLAS/CMS results ● Results - ATLAS/CMS searches/measurements ○ What different results do we produce ○ What are the implications for interpreting these results for arbitrary new physics models ● The MCnet point of view ○ What do we need from our physics predictions to reinterpret results ○ Rivet/Contur - MCnet projects aiming to tackle these problems 2 Results Roughly speaking need to know how to ● L - Luminosity, known convert a particle level simulation (MC ● A - Acceptance, effectively the Generator output) σ to an observed count analysis definition in a detector volume N ○ Can be simple, what about obs complicated analyses, BDTs for S/B discrimination etc. ● ϵ - Efficiency, Detector simulation ○ Approximate detector sims, e.g. Delphes used Current hot topic inside/outside experiment, how do we deliver A and ϵ better? 3 Example: Detector level results Detector Level Result - e.g. monojet Need Detector Simulation and Signal Acceptance Something like CheckMATE (Delphes + analysis def) To reinterpret these results in terms of a new model 4 Example: Particle level results Particle Level Result Lots of different ways to try and do more for reinterpretability from the experiments, no clear solution for all All come with different caveats on usability Conservative limits with A.ϵ given 5 Generic resonance limits Z’->ll Example: Unfolding Segues nicely to a particular ATLAS analysis that is of interest (and that I work on!) Experiment takes care of ϵ, use full detector simulation Validated rivet analysis gives A (as for all SM rivet routines that are already in Rivet arxiv.org/abs/1707.03263 Unfold a measurement of σ(Z->/Z->ll) = RMiss Provides detector corrected measurements of distribution sensitive to production of invisible particles at the LHC, first unfolded measurement to do this Can apply to DM models, SUSY….
    [Show full text]
  • Item Sequence Control Number Author Title, Part No. & Title Publisher
    Item sequence Control number Author Title, part no. & title Publisher Edition Publication date SCIENCE/TECHNOLOGY 0003223957 Webb, Stephen Pure mathematics 2 : for A and AS level : the University of London modular m London : Collins Educational 1994 SCIENCE/TECHNOLOGY 0003225038 A2 mathematics / John Berry ... [et al.] London : Collins Educational 2001 SCIENCE/TECHNOLOGY 0006544894 Capra, Fritjof The Tao of physics : an exploration of the parallels between modern physics London : Flamingo 3rd ed. 1992 SCIENCE/TECHNOLOGY 000712421x Facer, George, 1937A2 chemistry / George Facer London : Collins 2002 SCIENCE/TECHNOLOGY 0007133138 Thomson, Keith StewThe watch on the heath : science and religion before Darwin / Keith Thomson London : HarperCollins 2005 SCIENCE/TECHNOLOGY 0007149522 Holmes, Richard The age of wonder : how the Romantic generation discovered the beauty and te HarperCollins 2008 SCIENCE/TECHNOLOGY 0007152515 Singh, Simon Big bang : the most important scientific discovery of all time and why you n London : Fourth Estate 2004 SCIENCE/TECHNOLOGY 0007171803 Morton, Oliver Eating the sun : the everyday miracle of how plants power the planet / Olive London : Fourth Estate 2009 SCIENCE/TECHNOLOGY 000717604x Singh, Simon The cracking code book : how to make it, break it, hack it, crack it / Simon London : HarperCollinsChildren's 2004 SCIENCE/TECHNOLOGY 000719921x Levy, David H. Skywatching : the ultimate guide to the universe / David Levy London : Collins (2005 printing) 1995 SCIENCE/TECHNOLOGY 000721331x Ridley, Matt Francis Crick : Discoverer of the genetic code / Matt Ridley London : HarperPerennial ; [distributor] 2008 SCIENCE/TECHNOLOGY 0007240198 Goldacre, Ben Bad science Fourth Estate 2008 SCIENCE/TECHNOLOGY 0007243383 Masters, Alexander The genius in my basement : the biography of a happy man / Alexander Masters London : Fourth Estate 2011 SCIENCE/TECHNOLOGY 0007267452 Boyle, Mike Biology / Mike Boyle, Kathryn Senior London : Collins Educational 3rd ed.
    [Show full text]
  • International Workshop on Discovery Physics at the LHC
    International Workshop on Discovery Physics at the LHC (Kruger2018) Journal of Physics: Conference Series Volume 1271 Kruger, South Africa 3 – 7 December 2018 ISBN: 978-1-5108-9188-3 ISSN: 1742-6588 Printed from e-media with permission by: Curran Associates, Inc. 57 Morehouse Lane Red Hook, NY 12571 Some format issues inherent in the e-media version may also appear in this print version. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 International Licence. Licence details: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/. No changes have been made to the content of these proceedings. There may be changes to pagination and minor adjustments for aesthetics. Printed with permission by Curran Associates, Inc. (2019) For permission requests, please contact the Institute of Physics at the address below. Institute of Physics Dirac House, Temple Back Bristol BS1 6BE UK Phone: 44 1 17 929 7481 Fax: 44 1 17 920 0979 [email protected] Additional copies of this publication are available from: Curran Associates, Inc. 57 Morehouse Lane Red Hook, NY 12571 USA Phone: 845-758-0400 Fax: 845-758-2633 Email: [email protected] Web: www.proceedings.com Table of contents Volume 1271 International Workshop on Discovery Physics at the LHC (Kruger2018) 3–7 December 2018, Kruger, South Africa Accepted papers received: 5 June 2019 Published online: 26 July 2019 Preface International Workshop on Discovery Physics at the LHC (Kruger2018) Photographs Peer review statement Papers ALICE Highlights of the production of (anti-)(hyper-)nuclei and exotica
    [Show full text]
  • Arxiv:2006.10951V2 [Hep-Ph] 26 Jun 2021 Calculations of Known Particles and Interactions Are Just As Important to Validate, Redress, Or Refute New Models
    Two-loop renormalisation of gauge theories in 4D Implicit Regularisation and connections to dimensional methods A. Cherchiglia,1, ∗ D. C. Arias-Perdomo,1, y A. R. Vieira,2, z M. Sampaio,1, x and and B. Hiller3, { 1CCNH, Universidade Federal do ABC, 09210-580 , Santo André - SP, Brazil 2Universidade Federal do Triângulo Mineiro, Iturama, MG 38280-000, Brazil 3CFisUC, Department of Physics, University of Coimbra, P-3004-516 Coimbra, Portugal. We compute the two-loop β-function of scalar and spinorial quantum electrodynamics as well as pure Yang-Mills and quantum chromodynamics using the background field method in a fully quadridimensional setup using Implicit Regularization (IREG). Moreover, a thorough comparison with dimensional approaches such as conventional dimensional regularization (CDR) and dimensional reduction (DRED) is presented. Subtleties related to Lorentz alge- bra contractions/symmetric integrations inside divergent integrals as well as renormalisation schemes are carefully discussed within IREG where the renormalisation constants are fully defined as basic divergent integrals to arbitrary loop order. Moreover, we confirm the hy- pothesis that momentum routing invariance in the loops of Feynman diagrams implemented via setting well-defined surface terms to zero deliver non-abelian gauge invariant amplitudes within IREG just as it has been proven for abelian theories. I. MOTIVATIONS Unravelling physics beyond the standard model (SM) has entreated theoretical predictions for particle physics precision observables beyond next-to-leading-order (NLO). Such predictions rely on involved Feynman diagram calculations to evaluate scattering amplitudes both in the SM and its extensions. Theoretical models beyond the SM (BSM) can be constructed, for instance, as an extension in the Higgs sector by either changing the number of scalar multiplets or considering the Higgs boson as a composite particle – the so called Composite Higgs Models [1, 2].
    [Show full text]
  • The Standard Model and Beyond: ATLAS
    The Standard Model and Beyond: ATLAS Jonathan Butterworth University College London Corfu Summer Institute 1/9/2013 1/9/2013 Jon Butterworth, UCL 1 1/9/2013 Jon Butterworth, UCL 2 1/9/2013 Jon Butterworth, UCL 4 1/9/2013 Jon Butterworth, UCL 5 Measurements Discovery Searches 1/9/2013 Jon Butterworth, UCL 6 Measurements 1/9/2013 Jon Butterworth, UCL 7 Low scales, high cross section: Inelastic cross section & rapidity gaps 1/9/2013 Jon Butterworth, UCL 8 Jets at the highest scales • Highest transverse momentum jets; at the TeV scale • arXiv:1009.5908 (EPJC),arXiv: 1112.6297 (PRD) • arXiv:1106.0208 (PRL) Jets at the highest scales • Highest transverse momentum jets; at the TeV scale • arXiv:1009.5908 (EPJC),arXiv: 1112.6297 (PRD) • arXiv:1106.0208 (PRL) • General agreement with NLO QCD calculations (after soft corrections) Significant spread in “NLO” predictions. ME/PS matching? MC tune (UE)? PDFs?" 10 Jets as a probe of the proton •! Use 2.76 TeV CM data to measure cross sections. •! Ratios; •! in xT, many theory uncertainties ~cancel (same x, different Q2) arXiv:1304.4739! 11 Jets as a probe of the proton •! Use 2.76 TeV CM data to measure cross sections. •! Ratios; •! in xT, many theory uncertainties ~cancel (same x, different Q2) •! In pT, jet energy scale ~cancels (dominant experimental uncertainty) arXiv:1304.4739! 12 Jets as a probe of the proton •! Illustrative fit to HERA and ATLAS data •! Valence quarks heavily constrained by HERA •! High x gluon and sea quarks modified by addition of ATLAS data ATLAS-CONF-2012-128! 1/9/2013 13 Running of the strong coupling Jet properties •! Final stage of jet structure is “soft” non-perturbative QCD.
    [Show full text]
  • An Introduction to Jet Substructure and Boosted-Object Phenomenology
    Looking inside jets: an introduction to jet substructure and boosted-object phenomenology Simone Marzani1, Gregory Soyez2, and Michael Spannowsky3 1Dipartimento di Fisica, Universit`adi Genova and INFN, Sezione di Genova, Via Dodecaneso 33, 16146, Italy 2IPhT, CNRS, CEA Saclay, Universit´eParis-Saclay, F-91191 Gif-sur-Yvette, France 3Institute of Particle Physics Phenomenology, Physics Department, Durham University, Durham DH1 3LE, UK arXiv:1901.10342v3 [hep-ph] 17 Feb 2020 Preface The study of the internal structure of hadronic jets has become in recent years a very active area of research in particle physics. Jet substructure techniques are increasingly used in experimental analyses by the Large Hadron Collider collaborations, both in the context of searching for new physics and for Standard Model measurements. On the theory side, the quest for a deeper understanding of jet substructure algorithms has contributed to a renewed interest in all-order calculations in Quantum Chromodynamics (QCD). This has resulted in new ideas about how to design better observables and how to provide a solid theoretical description for them. In the last years, jet substructure has seen its scope extended, for example, with an increasing impact in the study of heavy-ion collisions, or with the exploration of deep-learning techniques. Furthermore, jet physics is an area in which experimental and theoretical approaches meet together, where cross-pollination and collaboration between the two communities often bear the fruits of innovative techniques. The vivacity of the field is testified, for instance, by the very successful series of BOOST conferences together with their workshop reports, which constitute a valuable picture of the status of the field at any given time.
    [Show full text]
  • Science Writing Year 11-12
    Science Writing Year 11-12 Sarah Edwards Eynesbury Senior College Oliphant Science Awards Science Writing Submission Sarah Edwards Word Count: 1490 words (without references) The Communication, Collaboration and Scientific Development of the CERN Large Hadron Collider Introduction: CERN’s Large Hadron Collider (LHC), a 6.84 billion AUD project, has inspired significant milestones in particle physics as one of the greatest scientific feats of this century (Jamieson, 2019). A challenging design and engineering accomplishment, dissimilar to any previous project, the LHC has inspired communication and collaboration from scientists and engineers all over the world. Despite significant public backlash regarding safety and environmental impact, prior to the opening of the collider, the LHC has allowed physicists to answer questions related to models in quantum physics. This research has then been applied to the development of new technology in a range of fields including medicine and information technology. Despite only having completed a small portion of its aimed research thus far, the LHC has already influenced significant development in particle physics. Background on the Large Hadron Collider Project: CERN’s LHC operates at energy levels seven times greater than any particle accelerator previously made. The collider allows physicists to reproduce conditions existing a billionth of a second after the Big Bang by colliding high-energy protons and ions (Jamieson, 2019).Awards Weighing more than 38,000 tonnes, the LHC consists of a 27-kilometre circle, set one-hundred metresCOPY below ground-level (CERN, 2008). Within this ring, two beams of particles travel in opposite directionsNOT in separate beam pipes (two tubes maintained at ultra-high vacuum).
    [Show full text]