RE: New probes of leptoquarks at CERN's Large Hadron Collider

avatar
(Edited)

You are viewing a single comment's thread:

First of all, I must say that it is a pleasure to be able to interact in some way, through this platform, with a Particle Physicist, that starting from the amount that you comment in the comments that exist in the world, an average of 10,000 in a world population of more than 7 billion, I can really say that you are part of a scientific elite, which is something very important.

I have read your post and I have reviewed some of the links you have left, evidencing that I definitely know little about it, therefore, I have more doubts than answers on this subject. But taking advantage of the fact that you will most likely be able to offer some answers, I don't want to pass up the opportunity.

I understand that leptoquarks are hypothetical, that is, they most probably exist, and they are looking for a way to study how they are related to other micro elements, which I know implies a great work of imagination based on science, because it is not something they can see properly, but rather deduce based on the elements that are in the experiment and the results that a machine can register.

This I can intuit from the knowledge I acquired in Biochemistry in my medical studies, where we cannot see biochemical processes, but we can intuit what is happening based on results.

Well, I have a question:
If you an your team discover completely how leptoquarks interact with other elements, what would be the usefulness of this discovery, obviously, my level of ignorance on the subject makes me look for the practical point to the information that could be obtained from the study that you and your team perform.

For example, I know that molecules when joining or separating release energy, and they use it in large quantities. Could this discovery allow us to produce energy? Will it be useful to understand other aspects of the origin of the universe itself? These are doubts that arose when I read your interesting publication.

And excuse the length of this comment...



0
0
0.000
3 comments
avatar

First of all, I must say that it is a pleasure to be able to interact in some way, through this platform, with a Particle Physicist, that starting from the amount that you comment in the comments that exist in the world, an average of 10,000 in a world population of more than 7 billion, I can really say that you are part of a scientific elite, which is something very important.

It is also my pleasure to engage with the wider society through Hive. When I wanted to create my blog, I was suggested to come to this platform (when it carried another name), as it was new, web3, etc. I don't regret the move.

I would like to clarify one thing. I don't consider that I belong to any kind of scientific elite, but rather to a field of science that includes a small number of researchers. There are many reasons behind this, funding behind among them (other fields of science are more attractive for investors and funding agencies; this brings more students, and so on).

I have read your post and I have reviewed some of the links you have left, evidencing that I definitely know little about it, therefore, I have more doubts than answers on this subject. But taking advantage of the fact that you will most likely be able to offer some answers, I don't want to pass up the opportunity.

Please don't hesitate to ask me anything. I will try to answer it all (and feel free to come back to me if extra clarifications are in order).

I understand that leptoquarks are hypothetical, that is, they most probably exist, and they are looking for a way to study how they are related to other micro elements, which I know implies a great work of imagination based on science, because it is not something they can see properly, but rather deduce based on the elements that are in the experiment and the results that a machine can register.

We do not know whether leptoquarks exist or not. We only know that the Standard Model is not the end of the story (see here for instance). There are several ways to extend the Standard Model and cure some of its practical and conceptual limitations. Some of these manners predict the existence of leptoquarks.

As we do not know how to extend the Standard Model, all possibilities must be tested for. In this blog, we focus on models predicting leptoquarks. One way to test them is to look for leptoquarks at particle colliders like the LHC at CERN. In practice, we investigate possible hints of leptoquarks through signatures that could emerge from their presence in the theory. For instance, this could be a copious production of collider events with two jets of strongly interacting particles (originating from two quarks) and two leptons. In this case, the signal would be the production of two leptoquarks that each decays into one jet and one lepton.

If you an your tema discover completely how leptoquarks interact with other elements, what would be the usefulness of this discovery, obviously, my level of ignorance on the subject makes me look for the practical point to the information that could be obtained from the study that you and your team perform.

Just to make it clear, it is not my team. I am a theorist, so that my job is to study how new phenomena could manifest in experiments, and use experimental results to corner better how extending the Standard Model could work or could not work. The experimental collaborations are groups of 3,000 researchers well organised in sub-groups dedicated to this or that task. At the end, an experimental analysis is carried out by few researchers, and hundreds of analyses are managed in parallel.

In the work I presented here, we investigated extra signals associated with motivated models of leptoquarks and that were not covered experimentally. This should motivate our experimental colleagues to extend their searches, in order not to miss a new phenomenon by just forgetting to look in one place. Of course, it is also possible that leptoquarks do not exist. But curiosity is the key, and it is as important to check all possibilities and all options for finding something new.

In terms of practical applications, there is none. What we aim at is to advance knowledge and understand how our universe functions at its most fundamental level.

This will have zero impact on your life. However, we design new technologies for our experiments for free (no patent), we train students and researchers to think deeply and solve hard problems (so that they could join the private sector after their thesis or a postdoc fellowship and enrich it by their hardly gained expertise), etc. The immediate added value to society is thus not in any practical applications to our findings, but elsewhere.

I hope this clarifies your questions. If not, feel free to come back to me!

Cheers!

0
0
0.000
avatar

I understand what you explain to me in relation to your work, however, it is still something really interesting, because surely you have knowledge of things that most, most likely, do not even imagine exists, that is something of respect.
I have always greatly admired this investigative area of ​​science, theory is as important as practice, one must go hand in hand with the other, it is reality for me.
Regardless of the fact that there is no possible application in practice of these discoveries, or probable discoveries, I believe that the constant search is what ultimately leads to great things, because in the investigative path a light is always shed on something that leads to other things. Maybe it's my own thing, but I really believe it, a restless mind, that walks with the intention of discovering, ends up discovering.
Thanks for the reply

0
0
0.000
avatar

Regardless of the fact that there is no possible application in practice of these discoveries, or probable discoveries, I believe that the constant search is what ultimately leads to great things, because in the investigative path a light is always shed on something that leads to other things. Maybe it's my own thing, but I really believe it, a restless mind, that walks with the intention of discovering, ends up discovering.
Thanks for the reply

I think I must clarify this (cf. my answer to the comment of @agmoore). There is no application today. But who knows what could be the impact of the next great discovery in 100 years from now? This is something impossible to predict.

Cheers! :)

0
0
0.000