Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Fermilab Discovers Untheorized Particle

ScuttleMonkey posted more than 5 years ago | from the surprise-particles dept.

Science 217

alevy writes to mention that scientists at Fermilab have detected a new, completely untheorized particle. Seems like Fermi has been a hotbed of activity lately with the discovery of a new single top quark and narrowing the gap twice on the Higgs Boson particle. "The Y(4140) particle is the newest member of a family of particles of similar unusual characteristics observed in the last several years by experimenters at Fermilab's Tevatron as well as at KEK and the SLAC lab, which operates at Stanford through a partnership with the U.S. Department of Energy. 'We congratulate CDF on the first evidence for a new unexpected Y state that decays to J/psi and phi,' said Japanese physicist Masanori Yamauchi, a KEK spokesperson. 'This state may be related to the Y(3940) state discovered by Belle and might be another example of an exotic hadron containing charm quarks. We will try to confirm this state in our own Belle data.'"

cancel ×

217 comments

fp (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27273067)

frist tsop

whew... untheorized... (5, Funny)

Tibor the Hun (143056) | more than 5 years ago | (#27273093)

At first I read it as "unauthorized" and thought someone will have a lot of explaining to do.

Re:whew... untheorized... (5, Funny)

Amazing Quantum Man (458715) | more than 5 years ago | (#27273229)

Damn. Now I'll have to update my authorized_particles file!

Re:whew... untheorized... (3, Funny)

ionix5891 (1228718) | more than 5 years ago | (#27273413)

Damn. Now I'll have to update my authorized_particles file [slashdot.org] !

Kevin Rudd [pm.gov.au] is that you?

Re:whew... untheorized... (1)

The Grim Reefer2 (1195989) | more than 5 years ago | (#27273787)

Damn. Now I'll have to update my authorized_particles file!

More importantly does Gordon Freeman know about this?

Re:whew... untheorized... (2, Funny)

Red Flayer (890720) | more than 5 years ago | (#27274467)

I read it as OggTheorized.

I thought, "No wonder this is the first time it's been viewed".

*please don't kill me. It's a joke (although I do prefer Xvid).

Re:whew... untheorized... (1)

jd (1658) | more than 5 years ago | (#27273451)

It might be both. It IS only a few days after St. Patrick's!

Re:whew... untheorized... (1)

jellomizer (103300) | more than 5 years ago | (#27273459)

May not have found the God Particle but we found the Devil Particle.

Re:whew... untheorized... (4, Funny)

TubeSteak (669689) | more than 5 years ago | (#27273507)

Dear Jesus,

You have to be happy with the 2 authorized books I've put out.
Stop making up unauthorized stuff to confuse my creation.

-Yaweh

Re:whew... untheorized... (4, Funny)

c_forq (924234) | more than 5 years ago | (#27274539)

I'm confused, what are the two authorized books? The Epic of Gilgamesh and the Torah? The Talmud and the Koran were both written after Jesus.

Re:whew... untheorized... (0, Offtopic)

TaoPhoenix (980487) | more than 5 years ago | (#27273573)

That particle is helping terrorists! Put it on Australia's and Denmark's Censored Particles List! Anyone who links to that particle must be punished!

Re:whew... untheorized... (5, Funny)

novakyu (636495) | more than 5 years ago | (#27273593)

Not so fast. The scientists at Fermilab might still face a heavy fine for their crime [nobelprize.org] .

I quote Willis Lamb, Nobel Laureate,

"The finder of a new elementary particle used to be rewarded by a Nobel Prize, but such a discovery now ought to be punished by a $10,000 fine."

And that was in the 50s, so with the inflation, you can only guess how heavy the fine would be now.

Re:whew... untheorized... (1)

canuck08 (1421409) | more than 5 years ago | (#27273659)

Well heck, *I* sure as hell didn't authorize this.
I demand a public inquiry!

Re:whew... untheorized... (1)

Hoi Polloi (522990) | more than 5 years ago | (#27273669)

They should've saved this for April 1st.

Re:whew... untheorized... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27273709)

I seriously saw the same thing...

Re:whew... untheorized... (1)

Da_Biz (267075) | more than 5 years ago | (#27273803)

"A Very Merry Unauthorized Higgs-Boson Particle"?

Naming things, publicity, and financing (2, Insightful)

Gat0r30y (957941) | more than 5 years ago | (#27273097)

Just a thought, if they want any more financing out of all this publicity, they should come up with a better name than Y(4140). Seriously, They are going to get some level of coverage for this, which they can use to try to get more financing. But if they stick with Y(4140), well it may not amount to nearly as much as if they called it say the Mystery Particle of Doom or something.

Re:Naming things, publicity, and financing (4, Funny)

Bill, Shooter of Bul (629286) | more than 5 years ago | (#27273155)

Yeah, maybe not doom. People are already upset of the minuscule chance of LHC creating a black hole. Maybe they should name it in honor of Obama who hails from the same state (Illinois).

Call it the Hope particle.

Re:Naming things, publicity, and financing (4, Funny)

flyingsquid (813711) | more than 5 years ago | (#27273359)

Hrm. How about we call the mystery particle the "Obamaton"? Or perhaps it's a new type of quark, closely related to the 'strange' quark, the 'change' quark?

Re:Naming things, publicity, and financing (4, Funny)

jd (1658) | more than 5 years ago | (#27273541)

If it's related to the quark, it should be called Rom or Nog.

Re:Naming things, publicity, and financing (1)

MBGMorden (803437) | more than 5 years ago | (#27273613)

I think Moogie would be cooler . . .

Re:Naming things, publicity, and financing (1)

jd (1658) | more than 5 years ago | (#27273649)

Well, that depends. Could you build a nanotech Moog from them?

Re:Naming things, publicity, and financing (4, Funny)

pushing-robot (1037830) | more than 5 years ago | (#27273889)

If it's related to the quark, it should be called Rom or Nog.

Hmm. If I was a particle physicist, I'd be leaning more toward "nagus".

Re:Naming things, publicity, and financing (1)

ionix5891 (1228718) | more than 5 years ago | (#27273447)

Call it the Hope particle.

call it Black Hole [nytimes.com] particle

Re:Naming things, publicity, and financing (3, Funny)

Gat0r30y (957941) | more than 5 years ago | (#27273977)

Yea, but with doom in the name, maybe they could get there hands on some of that sweet DHS "anti-terrorist" money. "We gotta do more basic science research, don't want the terrorists getting there hands on the doom particle"

Re:Naming things, publicity, and financing (4, Insightful)

Bill, Shooter of Bul (629286) | more than 5 years ago | (#27274379)

Anti-terrorism, scare mongering is so 2008. Economic Stimulus is the new antiTerrorism. But I can't think of a better name than Hope.

Re:Naming things, publicity, and financing (4, Insightful)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | more than 5 years ago | (#27273203)

Perhaps they learned their lesson from the whole "God Particle" thing. If I were a physicist, I'd be really bloody annoyed after about the third time some babbling moron, convinced that my work had theological significance, interrupted me. Nobody is going to interrupt the guys working on Y(1440).

Re:Naming things, publicity, and financing (4, Funny)

jd (1658) | more than 5 years ago | (#27273557)

I dunno. It might cause a reunion of The Village People, if they can figure out a way to handle the extra syllable.

Great point - educate, don't market (4, Insightful)

hellfire (86129) | more than 5 years ago | (#27274275)

I understand that sometimes you have to "sell" something to the masses, but sometimes it's better to take the long way around and instead of selling it to them, work on educating them. There's a subtle difference. Marketing is jazzing up the name is marketing. Explaining it's significance and telling you what we could do with that knowledge is education. Education has a longer term significance, and encourages the masses in general to learn more. In the US the populace is getting less and less interested in becoming educated because we are too concerned with marketing and sound bites and what sounds good without explaining what is good.

Besides, the words Calculus, Gravity, Physics, and neuropsychology weren't picked for their marketability.

Re:Naming things, publicity, and financing (4, Funny)

0xABADC0DA (867955) | more than 5 years ago | (#27274555)

Nobody is going to interrupt the guys working on Y(1440).

That's because Y(1440) is a particle of no real consequence... not like Y(1441), the only unknown particle capable of stabilizing a miniature black hole long enough for it to grow by 'eating' the nearby matter.

If they had discovered that particle your work
would surely
be inter
upt
te
d
.

Re:Naming things, publicity, and financing (2, Interesting)

niklask (1073774) | more than 5 years ago | (#27273445)

Or maybe not. There are way to many mesons and baryons (hadrons) out there to give them all individual names. The name Y(4140) follows a well established scheme. Y(x) are all upsilon mesons (b-bbar) and x stands for the mass of the given resonance.

Re:Naming things, publicity, and financing (2, Insightful)

niklask (1073774) | more than 5 years ago | (#27273901)

I have to correct myself. This is not the upsilon meson, but it still is an established naming scheme and I still think that naming it some stupid name like "mystery doom particle" or something is just ridiculous.

Re:Naming things, publicity, and financing (1)

Lord Ender (156273) | more than 5 years ago | (#27273665)

Call it "The Jesus Particle" and southern senators will finally vote for science funding.

Re:Naming things, publicity, and financing (1)

Hoi Polloi (522990) | more than 5 years ago | (#27273731)

We congratulate CDF on the first evidence for a new unexpected Y state that decays to J/psi and phi

I'm sorry but this is the THIRD time I've heard someone say this today alone!

Re:Naming things, publicity, and financing (1)

Culture20 (968837) | more than 5 years ago | (#27274341)

Sell the naming rights to a financially strapped company. The AIG particle, anyone?

Re:Naming things, publicity, and financing (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27274463)

Spacebat. In honor of.

What does this say about the search for the Higgs? (5, Interesting)

The_mad_linguist (1019680) | more than 5 years ago | (#27273099)

Does the creation of a previously unanticipated particle imply issues with current theory significant enough to make the LHC experiment less useful? Even if we find the Higgs, the current model will still be insufficient.

Re:What does this say about the search for the Hig (4, Informative)

Cyberax (705495) | more than 5 years ago | (#27273433)

We _know_ that the current theory is insufficient. It doesn't explain gravity, for one thing.

LHC will allow to test some alternative theories, so we really need it. Also, we still need to check the existance of Higgs.

Re:What does this say about the search for the Hig (2)

Relic of the Future (118669) | more than 5 years ago | (#27273559)

Probably not. The scientist's current guess is that it's an unexplained combination involving charmed quarks; possibly with gluons or as part of a four-quark structure. Which we don't have any theories to support... but it's not quite so bad as having to trash the standard model. Same set of pieces, but put together in a way we didn't expect.

At least, that's the guess. If they're wrong, that would be much more interesting!

Re:What does this say about the search for the Hig (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27273691)

God's just fucking with them.

Re:What does this say about the search for the Hig (1)

SBacks (1286786) | more than 5 years ago | (#27274149)

charmed quarks

They are a type of quark named "charm quarks".
They are not a quark that has been bewitched.

Re:What does this say about the search for the Hig (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27274357)

. . . or does it make the LHC more dangerous?

Another example (-1, Troll)

SnarfQuest (469614) | more than 5 years ago | (#27273101)

another example of an exotic hadron containing charm quarks.

Is Obama one of the other examples?

Re:Another example (4, Funny)

Creepy Crawler (680178) | more than 5 years ago | (#27273501)

Charm my ass..

He just makes fun of the special olympics.

Re:Another example (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27273753)

fuck those cripples.

Naming time? (4, Funny)

TinBromide (921574) | more than 5 years ago | (#27273105)

For its name, I nominate Splork! [smbc-comics.com]

Re:Naming time? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27274589)

Naming time? (Score:3, Funny)

For its name, I nominate Splork! [smbc-comics.com]

WELL I THINK THAT THE MORE CAPITAL LETTERS THE BETTER.

Quote (2, Funny)

Blakey Rat (99501) | more than 5 years ago | (#27273107)

"This state may be related to the Y(3940) state discovered by Belle and might be another example of an exotic hadron containing charm quarks. We will try to confirm this state in our own Belle data."

That was my yearbook quote!

Thanks for dumbing down the summary (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27273115)

Thanks for "dumbing down" the article summary:
"...new unexpected Y state that decays to J/psi and phi,' said Japanese physicist Masanori Yamauchi, a KEK spokesperson. 'This state may be related to the Y(3940) state discovered by Belle and might be another example of an exotic hadron containing charm quarks"
Well. That makes things a whole lot clearer now!

a KEK spokesperson stated (0)

stun (782073) | more than 5 years ago | (#27273119)

another example of an exotic hardon containing "charm" quarks.

Please tag "fucktheLHC" (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27273159)

Please tag "fucktheLHC".

"Basic" Research (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27273201)

This is why we need to invest in science research, you never know what you might discover when you start looking. Its a shame the US Superconducting Super Collider [wikipedia.org] (which would have been more powerful than the Large Hadron Collider) wasn't built 15 years ago. Where might we be now? Whats $12 billion dollars to make discoveries like this?

exotic hardon (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27273207)

Wow, I totally saw that as "exotic hardon"... "hadron" is now my favorite word of all time! :)

"might be another example of an exotic hadron containing charm quarks. We will try to confirm this state in our own Belle data.'"

Re:exotic hardon (1)

Vectronic (1221470) | more than 5 years ago | (#27274383)

I think that's why some people are so upset about the LHC, it's a large hardon, whereas the US only has Fermilab, barely firm. Guess if they find the god particle, they'll orgasm, and we'll end up with Spermilab, Fetulab, Infalab, etc...

(probably should post AC)

Re:exotic hardon (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27274595)

My ex wife liked to collide with large, exotic hardons. Had to kick her to the curb for that.

Thank goodness (4, Insightful)

thanasakis (225405) | more than 5 years ago | (#27273227)

If we already had it all figured out, it would get pretty boring very quickly.

Sometimes it is reassuring to know that there might be possibilities that we not yet aware of.

Re:Thank goodness (4, Insightful)

GreatDrok (684119) | more than 5 years ago | (#27273467)

"If we already had it all figured out, it would get pretty boring very quickly."

Indeed. One of the great attractions of science in general is the fact that there is always something new to learn. The day you make your first discovery, solve a problem that has stumped other researchers for years, those are the days you live for.

Other times, its the whole "that's funny" thing where you simply notice something odd and it leads you in a completely unanticipated direction. The primary difference between people who go into science and those who avoid it is that scientists aren't worried by being proven wrong about something (at least they shouldn't be) since it is probable that what you discovered is way more interesting. There are also those people who like to think they know everything that is ever going to be known and who will shun and deny knowledge that contradicts their beliefs. They just love when scientists find something they didn't expect because they think it means science is wrong. Fact is, science is always wrong about something and admitting being wrong is the first step to learning more. If you can't admit you're wrong, well, you're learning nothing and just consuming resources until something else consumes you. But I'm sure Jebus loves you so don't feel too bad......

Re:Thank goodness (1)

thedonger (1317951) | more than 5 years ago | (#27273585)

There are also those people who like to think they know everything that is ever going to be known and who will shun and deny knowledge that contradicts their beliefs.

Shun the non-believer. Shun. Shuuuuuuuuuu-nnnnn. Nnn.

Re:Thank goodness (2, Informative)

amoeba1911 (978485) | more than 5 years ago | (#27273715)

Jesus loves everyone*


*everyone: excludes muslims, jews, atheists, protestants, people who work on sundays, gays, lesbians, people with aids, and people.

Re:Thank goodness (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27273971)

No. Everyone == Everyone.

Its the "christians" (or in other words people) that make the distinctions. But heck He knows that and loves them inspite of that.

Oh, wait! you were trolling, hoping to catch a Christian so you can push your personal view onto them. Sorry. I guess I'll just post anon so I don't have to listen to your fanatical rave about how all religion is evil.

Sheesh, sometimes you athiests are worse than the "Christian" "fundamentalists".

Re:Thank goodness (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27274045)

>>But I'm sure Jebus loves you so don't feel too bad......

For fucks sake, you can be a Christian and a scientist with an inquiring mindset.

Sticking your head in the ground is a degenerate trait found everywhere in humanity, and has little to do with being a Christian.

Re:Thank goodness (1)

Aphoxema (1088507) | more than 5 years ago | (#27274473)

I like one of the comments on the article, something about over 99% of all scientists in human history are still alive today. Makes sense to me.

Re:Thank goodness (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27274607)

There are those out there that seem to care what they think too.

I have been thinking about this lately. Why do we really care that they do not believe you? Oh sure its aggravating. But really does it matter? It is as if we insist on making sure we are 'right' when by the very nature of the kind of science we are talking about we are not. We even admit it when cornered.

I have noticed this group who seem to be overly preoccupied with telling the other group off because they do not believe it.

Many of this same group will take at face value whatever a 'scientist' says and TOTALY ignore anyone elses opinion. Science can come from people who are not scientists. It is as almost as if even LISTENING to the alternate idea is wrong. It is as if they have switched one religious belief system for another.

The other group is understandably ignoring the information. It changes all the time. The theories are shifting around (as well they should be). One day its one thing the next something totally different. If every day you came to me with something that contradicted what you told me the day before I would be skeptical of anything you said.

And yes Jesus does love you (thats all there is to it nothing more, no strings, nothing btw). Me I love when scientists find something new about the universe. I just learned something new. Now I do take exception to people throwing around assumptions based on baseless things (on BOTH sides). Some parts of 'science' have almost religious feel to them. I do not understand that. To say anything contradictory gets you shuned just as fervently as some religious groups do.

Can't wait for my first day (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27273235)

I took an offer a couple of weeks ago to work at Fermilab (my start date is in two weeks). Hope there's work left for me to do when I start =)

Re:Can't wait for my first day (1)

eln (21727) | more than 5 years ago | (#27273567)

Of course there will be, they haven't even managed to create the black hole that will destroy mankind yet. This could be your big chance at .00000000001 seconds of fame before we all collapse into a singularity!

Seize the moment.

Re:Can't wait for my first day (1)

Aphoxema (1088507) | more than 5 years ago | (#27274445)

Who's to say the black hole hasn't already been created?

KEK spokesperson? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27273249)

Damn horde spokespersons always ganking me while I'm herbing for frost lotus in winterspring.

Yeah, "KEK" you too motherf***er!

Re:KEK spokesperson? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27273603)

AC:[Orcish] KEK

LHC (4, Funny)

simonbas (1319225) | more than 5 years ago | (#27273287)

damn it, after all those years and all that viagra I thought I finally had my Hadron!

All your base are belong to us (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27273345)

Our stranglets we send to you as our emissaries and you destroy them. All your base are belong to us.

Re:All your base are belong to us (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27273729)

What you say !!

But, but Photons ARE slowed down (1)

G3ckoG33k (647276) | more than 5 years ago | (#27273347)

Yes, I did skim through the articles.

At several places they claim that photons are weightless as they are not affected by the Higgs field. But, but Photons ARE slowed down, in many circumstances. What am I missing here? Apart from Physics 101 and beyond...

Re:But, but Photons ARE slowed down (1, Troll)

Cyberax (705495) | more than 5 years ago | (#27273491)

Nope. You're wrong, photons ARE NOT slowed down, ever (well, except for Casimir vacuum and virtual photons).

Photons traveling in material are constantly adsorbed and re-emitted, that's why they appear to travel slower.

Re:But, but Photons ARE slowed down (1)

jd (1658) | more than 5 years ago | (#27273633)

They won't be weightless, they'll be massless.

Re:But, but Photons ARE slowed down (1)

Aphoxema (1088507) | more than 5 years ago | (#27274431)

Only in metric, in good old American it'll be weightless like it oughtta be.

Re:But, but Photons ARE slowed down (2, Informative)

Zerth (26112) | more than 5 years ago | (#27274039)

Photons don't slow, they redshift. You're probably thinking of the speed of light in non-vacuum.

Just thinking about it... (1)

Jane Q. Public (1010737) | more than 5 years ago | (#27273505)

gives me a massive exotic hadron.

Wait a minute... (1)

Jane Q. Public (1010737) | more than 5 years ago | (#27273545)

isn't that from the Conway discussion?

Jeez. Small world.

they found it (1)

El_Muerte_TDS (592157) | more than 5 years ago | (#27273623)

So that's where my right sock is

Holes in the Standard Model (2, Insightful)

cheetah (9485) | more than 5 years ago | (#27273671)

Is this the second major hole in the Standard Model? I know neutrinos having mass is sort of a hole. But this sounds like a much larger break with the Standard Model. Anyone following this have more information?

Re:Holes in the Standard Model (1)

olclops (591840) | more than 5 years ago | (#27273867)

IANAPP, but It's not really a hole, as far as I understand it. It's also not technically a "particle". It's really just a configuration that certain quarks can combine in, which no one expected. Which, granted, is a particle in the way a proton or neutron is a particle. But it's not truly fundamental.

How they did it (1)

amliebsch (724858) | more than 5 years ago | (#27273693)

They deviated a bit from standard analysis procedures. They boosted the anti-mass spectrometer 105%. Bit of a gamble, but they needed the extra resolution.

Re:How they did it (2, Funny)

Aphoxema (1088507) | more than 5 years ago | (#27274421)

Go ahead, Gordon. Insert the specimen.

Standard model includes six quarks (1)

janwedekind (778872) | more than 5 years ago | (#27273717)

"The glimmering rectangular shape that had once seemed no more than a slab of crystal still floated before him, indifferent as he was to the harmless flames of the inferno beneath. It encapsulated yet unfathomed secrets of space and time, but some at least he now understood and was able to command. How obvious - how necessary - was that mathematical ratio of its sides, the quadratic sequence 1 : 4 : 9! And how naive to have imagined that the series ended at this point, in only three dimensions!" -- Arthur C. Clarke, 2001 A Space Odyssey

Nevermind (5, Funny)

Roberticus (1237374) | more than 5 years ago | (#27273739)

It was just a bat clinging to the inside of the accelerator.

Welcome (1)

JaneTheIgnorantSlut (1265300) | more than 5 years ago | (#27273789)

I, for one, welcome our new untheorized overlords.

Maybe it is a processing anomaly. (1)

Ken Broadfoot (3675) | more than 5 years ago | (#27273987)

It seems to me using computers to process oodles of information could introduce stuff that really isn't there. Like random number generators of the past that actually show patterns when graphed three dimensionally or two dimensionally.

Maybe it is just bug in the CPU's of said systems manifesting regularly when analyzing the data sets...

The regularity would "seem" like a new particle.

Just a thought....

Couple of questions.. (1)

miruku (642921) | more than 5 years ago | (#27273997)

"The Y(4140) particle decays into a pair of other particles, the J/psi and the phi, suggesting to physicists that it might be a composition of charm and anticharm quarks. However, the characteristics of this decay do not fit the conventional expectations for such a make-up. Other possible interpretations beyond a simple quark-antiquark structure are hybrid particles that also contain gluons, or even four-quark combinations."

a) how would researchers get from this data to understanding what the particle actually consists of?

b) what would be required to tell if this relates to any of the particle predictions by the An Exceptionally Simple Theory of Everything [wikipedia.org] ?

Intriguing! (1)

spaceyhackerlady (462530) | more than 5 years ago | (#27274067)

Just like Data used to say.

Some of the very best science has come from somebody looking over data, scratching their head and thinking, "That's funny..."

...laura

Anonymous Coward (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27274095)

Sorry, this paper http://arxiv.org/abs/0903.2229 only has a 3.8 sigma excess. You need a 5 sigma excess to officially claim discovery. However, 3.8 is still very interesting.

new particle? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27274199)

the new particle probably showed up, because
it couldn't get a new mortgage and had to move out ...

Charm Quarks.. (4, Funny)

StikyPad (445176) | more than 5 years ago | (#27274229)

They're magically suspicious.

Also they should rename the SciFi channel to Psi Phi.

Subatomic (1)

Ceiynt (993620) | more than 5 years ago | (#27274257)

I bet in about 200 years, as long as CERN doesn't kill us all, they will find out that protons and electrons really are there own unique universes, and that our universe if just some photon floating around, along with n+1 more photons.

luz (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27274259)

Lots of discussion for what I think not two of the people who replied to this thread actually understand.

Maybe a juxtaposition in the phrase 'hardon' brought you to this page?

Good! (1)

EddyPearson (901263) | more than 5 years ago | (#27274287)

Good, David wins again.

The most exciting words in science (5, Interesting)

Nimey (114278) | more than 5 years ago | (#27274289)

As Isaac Asimov wrote, the most exciting phrase to hear in science, the one that heralds new discoveries, is not "Eureka!" (I've found it!), but "That's funny...".

This is ridiculous ... (2, Insightful)

Gr333d (1485031) | more than 5 years ago | (#27274403)

So, there was this one guy who rephrased a word and more than 80 comments followed. None of those comments had anything to do with the actual news, just jokes and garbage. Is this slashdot nowadays? Trying to come up with the most original joke or comment. Or is it that none of the users here have any idea of physics!?
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...