They say the data point to five Higgs bosons with similar masses but different electric charges.
Three would have a neutral charge and one each would have a negative and positive electric charge. This is known as the two-Higgs doublet model.
Three would have a neutral charge and one each would have a negative and positive electric charge. This is known as the two-Higgs doublet model.
I suppose this makes a certain amount of sense. I would imagine the two charged h would couple to the Weak and EM, while the remaining three would have colour charge and couple to the Strong.
IIRC, the Tevatron is just on the boundary of being able to detect some of the possible Higgs producing interactions, so I'd treat this with a pinch of salt until things become a bit clearer in the coming years as the LHC pushes further into its range. I also get the feeling that everyone at the Tevatron is very anxious to beat the LHC to discovering the Higgs!
Either way, my lecturer works at the Tevatron, so I'm sure he's very smug right now!
The EM and strong forces have no Higgs couplings, as their carrier particles (photons and gluons) are massless. There's no proposal of any Higgs with a color charge as far as I'm aware, and definitely not in a SUSY model.
One Higgs doublet is actually four particles, three of which get "eaten" by the W+, W-, and Z bosons to generate their masses. (In technical terms, they're Goldstone bosons which provide the longitudinal polarization component; compare with the photon, which is massless and has no longitudinal polarization.) The fourth is what we generally think of as the actual "Higgs boson." If there were two doublets, that pattern would be repeated, so in addition to h, we'd have H+, H-, H, and A. (The A is a bit confusing given that A is usually used for photons in electroweak unification, but that's the convention.)
I'm at Fermilab this summer (working on CMS, though) and there is definitely a sense of rivalry. The Tevatron can no longer claim the highest energy, but this has just shifted everyone's bragging to focus on luminosity, where it still dominates.
US experiment hints at 'multiple God particles'
15/06/2010 04:04:14 AM
- 697 Views
I minored in modern physics, which means, I have enough knowledge to be.....
15/06/2010 04:45:35 AM
- 330 Views
this has always bothered me about particle physicists....
15/06/2010 05:32:26 AM
- 351 Views
Yeah, always been my problem, too.
15/06/2010 05:44:30 AM
- 292 Views
Lederman wanted to call it "the goddamn particle," but the publisher wouldn't let him.
15/06/2010 06:26:56 AM
- 314 Views
Well, we've been pretty bad at name stuff
15/06/2010 08:52:09 AM
- 320 Views
"Giant radiating dyke swarms"?!!!
15/06/2010 05:57:11 PM
- 317 Views
It's more than a few right answers.
15/06/2010 06:26:35 AM
- 438 Views
did you go to school in wisconsin? cause you sound just like that guy
15/06/2010 07:07:49 AM
- 297 Views
Yet, when determining the measure for what a planet is, Pluto vanished from the list!
15/06/2010 07:14:28 AM
- 328 Views
right, but it's still out there in the same orbit with the same momentum and positioning
15/06/2010 08:45:43 AM
- 418 Views
It had to lose its status or you'd have to memorize several more planets
15/06/2010 08:57:20 AM
- 353 Views
y'all are screwing up my "uncertainty principle" joke dammit! *NM*
15/06/2010 09:19:11 AM
- 136 Views
I was disappointed they didn't make all the dwarf planets into planet planets.
16/06/2010 01:00:51 PM
- 347 Views
As a physicist, I find this quite interesting.
16/06/2010 09:08:15 PM
- 437 Views
Not quite.
16/06/2010 09:57:18 PM
- 423 Views
Re: Not quite.
16/06/2010 10:22:14 PM
- 433 Views