Is this the 5 sigma result of a serious experiment? Nobody in his right mind will agree that the black data points are due to the dotted curve. (Taken from https://atlas.web.cern.ch/Atlas/GROUPS/PHYSICS/CONFNOTES/ATLAS-CONF-2012-091/ )
Bonus question: Are there more points above or below the red line?
Clara,
ReplyDeleteI see a lot of up and down fluctuation in the data but I have no clue on how the final graphs were arrived at. Tommaso has promised an explanation by tomorrow, so let's wait and see.
Where will we make the waist ? (i.e. the Higgs)
ReplyDelete(One tailor asks one lady)
I am also surprised with the complete absence of any comments about the "down fluctuations" or deeps (say, the deep at 120 GeV is quite significant -- seemingly not less than 3 sigma ! and it did not disappear with the growing statistics -- so, it is a kind of systematics).
A few words about "miniature black holes eating some events" would make me a bit happier!
Well, seriously, why they do not try to find some sources of systematic errors? a kind of pixelization as an aftermath of the triggering procedures, or, say, growing frozen moisture (those blizzards from The Groundhog day) on their detectors, or something else, I don't know what..
So, Clara, are you happy with Tomasso's response on his blog dated July, 9th?
ReplyDeleteOf course not. But he will say more soon, I hope.
ReplyDeleteMany jump to criticize you for asking bold questions but I support your position. An honest scientist must always be given the benefit of the doubt. Healthy skepticism is to be encouraged and hard questions are necessary.
ReplyDeleteI sincerely hope that no bias was introduced when analyzing the Higgs data of 2011 and 2012 and the two collaborations have truly worked independently. If there was a bias of sorts for the mH = 125 GeV Higgs ("keep looking" effect), we ought to hopefully find out by the end of the year.
We will see at the end of the year.
ReplyDelete