The theory, significance and precise calculation of gluino massDocument Transcript
==== ====The elusive particle: 5 Implications of finding Higgs Boson. Read more...http://9nl.com/goclick/==== ====This year the Large Hadron Collider at CERN in Geneva will commence operations. Its generallyexpected the LHC, as the worlds most powerful machine, is capable of producing supersymmetricparticles, otherwise known as sparticles.While most sparticles are confined to a lesser energy, any evidence of squarks will at least requirea mass-energy equivalent to a gluino g^ = 6.388355 TeV. For example, the first LHC runs maycreate a light Higgs boson, as evidenced by CERNs electron collider before it was terminated forthe upgrade. Though such confirmation will be ballyhooed as a major discovery of the standardmodel Higgs boson, it would be foolish if finding that was the only point of building the LHC. Butits certainly vindicated by the lack of evidence of sparticles to date. Likewise, the lepton colliderwas incapable of producing the raft of states encompassing the minimal supersymmetric Higgsmechanism, the heaviest of which imparts mass to the gluino. One can then be rest assured thereal interesting physics wont occur until the accelerator reaches higher relativistic energies offocused proton-antiproton collisions by maybe the end of 2008.In fact, its probably impossible to generate not just squarks, but the lightest sparticle - the Fermiequivalent of a Higgs boson better known as a neutralino (that constitutes the proportion ofgalactic dark mass called WIMPs) - without first producing a gluino. For what is referred to aboveas "the real interesting physics" reduces to a precisely mapped chain of transformational decaysthat further accounts for the observed dominance of fermion matter over anti-matter inbaryogenesis - the creation of material baryons; precursors of protons and neutrons.Its my opinion that in these senses the gluino represents the most important, yet presently seemsthe least appreciated or understood, state of the sparticle-particle spectrum. Likewise, there ismore to super-symmetry than just the idea of a sparticle as the inverse spin-state of a lighterfundamental particle. For example, a quark carries a fractional charge whose nature as a fermiondemands the existence of an anti-quark of opposite charge. A squark, on the other hand, is aboson of integer spin whose charge is ultimately determined by the first generation of the +2e/3-Up or -1e/3-Down family to which it belongs. So while the Up is the lightest quark, the sUp is theheaviest squark owing to an inverted flavor hierarchy where the heaviest Top quark correspondsto the lightest sTop squark, a nuance of SUSY thats not a mere function of fermi-bose spin-inversion. Yet just as importantly the Bose nature of squarks certainly reinforces the subsequentabsence of an identifiable Fermi-like state of antimatter: a -2/3 or +1/3 charged squark is simplynot allowed.And although it is far too light to produce three 1st generation squarks, only a neutral gluino isheavy enough to, and so in fact must, strongly decay into either a U-squark with two lightsBottoms or two D-squarks with, say, a sCharm. Given these demands, its rather easy to imaginehow a fixed squark charge from gluino decay is a prerequisite for material baryogenesis. Theres
much more to this of course, but our explanation here conveys the hard theoretic essence in plainEnglish. Although a couple of other models have been proposed which seem in accord, oramendable, with these conclusions, there is little evidence that any argument has effectivelychallenged the notoriously inadequate means of addressing baryogenesis in terms other than thesome variant of the standard model of CP [or CPT] symmetry violations from basically a high-energy meson-like quark-antiquark/gluon plasma - hardly stable matter. For theorists tocollectively acknowledge neutralino dark-mass, but not baryon-matter, as representing thePurposeful-consequence of SUSY - creating a viable physical world corresponding to the one welive in - is beyond comprehension or easy excuses.But then again, many experimentally-minded physicists believe that SUSY in any guise ishypothetical speculation barring empirical evidence otherwise, as if CERNs new toy wont test thisassumption soon enough. And I casually await these results with no less interest than anyoneelse. Yet itd surely be fair to question the advisability of disputing established theoretical criteriaof greater intellects, especially if merely based on an unsubstantiated claim of calculating theprecise gluino mass. In regards to the former critique, all Im saying is that no consensus or other"authority" provides any explanation for actual baryogenesis. By comparison, the proposedelucidation in fact supplies exact solutions for at least (well-measured) CP-violations in K-mesonsas an adjacent process for a final stage of literal baryogenesis. Which furthermore naturallyprovides a precise percentage of baryon matter relative to the critical density of universal massthats in fine accord with observational evidence - yet is supposedly a mere "coincidence"otherwise.But its the latter critique that demands the greater emphasis here as a follow-up to a previousessay (see resource box) about our central discoveries. In this regard, the gluino mass is given asthe first of four examples of data and proofs on the website, as well as before the introductory text.Two of these other choices utilize well-measured particle-states that constitute "pudding proofs"which empirically, as well as theoretically, confirm the calculation for the precise mass of the downand up, as well as, strange and bottom, quarks, in the latter case also verifying the mass of theHiggs vacuum minimum. While the gluino mass comparatively will lack full LHC-verificationbeyond 2008, it entails a hard proof nonetheless, though its not theoretical either. Rather, themass is given as a means to urge serious readers to taste and "eat the pudding" for themselves asthe first of two hands-on mathematical tasks. Which is to write three dimensionless equations asindependent ratios to other masses in an abbreviated sparticle-particle table following theintroductory chapter (as a prelude to receiving the expanded swamp of the full spectrumcontaining the gluino).For the point of the earlier article was that establishing a dimensionless system of ratios betweenmetric parameters is in itself insufficient and rather meaningless unless one is able to write adiscrete, pure numerical equation, which naturally is precisely predictive. If three independentequations exist as dimensionless ratios to the gluino mass, a cogent being might conclude that it isthe only possible answer even without experimental data to "back the claim." In any case, in thisproof the bowl of pudding is in your hands - and for six years that this material has been on theweb, everyone tested spilled everything before the first spoon hit their mouth - no one hassupplied one equation, let alone three. Seems nobody wants, recognizes or is willing to buyconcrete, or new, information anyway - theyre too busy trying to convince me, as each other, thatthey are real authorities.
Sean Sheeter is an independent theorist and author of the forthcoming hardcover "241-Mumbers:The Definitive Data for Fundamental Physics and Cosmology," now available as an e-course. Thegluino mass is one of four examples of Sample Data and Proofs found athttp://www.241mumbers.com/page2.html Interested parties are encouraged to subscribe to the e-training since successful solutions to the task of providing equations for this mass will warrant afree ever-updated subscription (or) at least (a far cheaper e-book for, say, a correct partial answer)unto the foreseeable future. Though the 241-mumbers website conveys a similar message withregard to the value of the e-course compared to the hardcover, this specific task is not mentionedbut rather is reserved for this essay as a perfect follow-up to http://www.ezinearticles.com/?Pure-Derivation-of-the-Exact-Fine-Structure-Constant-and-as-a-Ratio-of-Two-Inexact-Metric-Constants&id=907943For were trying to distribute this raft of unique information both as cheaply and directly (so,granted, to potentially the most customers) as possible - our foremost concern being theoptimized, hands-on learning process. The purpose of which is to insure that one respects ultimateauthority: the information and arguments themselves. But, as that concluding caveat alluded, inthe real academic-world, as with business or the google-eyed internet: money = self-promotion; ofyour job, institution, bosses and/or peers (which => more $/prestige: =Most$-> PR/Google-Yahoo!!). So who cares if it takes another seven years to sell one manuscript? But one thingsassured: whoever wants it will have earned it the one-and-only way it can be acquired, learned oritself respected. As the brethren say in the gnostical way to another down in JA, "enough respect,"except unto Jah, or just as reality, all else being relatively transitory self-illusion.Article Source:http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Sean_Sheeter==== ====The elusive particle: 5 Implications of finding Higgs Boson. Read more...http://9nl.com/goclick/==== ====