Supersymmetry BTFO

How will physics ever recover? Now that the LHC has failed what's next for particle physics?

nytimes.com/2017/06/19/science/cern-large-hadron-collider-higgs-physics.html

Other urls found in this thread:

sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/02/180201141432.htm
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

Bamp

>nytimes

They will either keep looking until they find a definite answer or they will make a new hypothesis based on what we know so far and start looking for that instead.

Because that's science.

Does this mean an official no to brane theories? No bulk outside reality?

inb4 geometric unity

The larger hadron collider.
Or maybe scientists will quit pursuing dead-end theories and get creative again.
The hunt for dark matter has been an epic failure. Maybe time should be spent on looking for the flaw in the reasoning that suggests dark matter is a thing instead of trying to make dark matter.

>Time machine
>Banging into each other at the speed of light
Two sentences in and I've already rolled my eyes right off the page. I mean I get that you want to use artistic license to make the story more compelling, but come on.

>subatomic particles
>protons

What do you think subatomic particles are?

so long as a proton is smaller than an entire atom then it is subatomic

0/10

Here is a report about the Large Hardon Collider more recent than June 2017,
from a more scientific source (University of Kansas) than The New York Times:
sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/02/180201141432.htm

So many little mistakes in this article and *that's* all you could find to point out?

Sorry CERN, but there's no new science left to discover that will actually impact the daily lives of people. You also can't discover something that is science fiction in the first place. Grant chasing fools who dream up this bullshit are to blame for these, "failures". They are not doing actual science. That is the whole reason CERN even exists.

>potential evidence
>potential

Bucket of horseshit.

Why brane and not string?

Smaller than a hydrogen atom

Because everything else fits?

I believe m therory unified string theories and concluded strings are stretched and warped to the point of being membranes, branes.

>Sorry CERN, but there's no new science left to discover that will actually impact the daily lives of people.

>they thought they could disprove me with their faggot machine

BLUE Spelling error
RED Crap which belongs on /x/
GREEN Nothing to do with CERN

Was unsure about "FTL". Probably impossible, but I couldn't exclude it and leave "wormholes" in.

Well, that's what a proton is.
Unless you're just talking about the nucleus of a hydrogen atom, in which case you're wrong.

>Now that the LHC has failed what's next for particle physics?

Collect and analyse the remaining >95% of the LHC dataset, for a start.

everything on that belongs on /x/, because it isn't real

it is a correct statement

CERN is nothing but grant chasing. The may up bullshit models and theories to pitch to their benefactors for money and easy autistic pursuits. It is worse than numerology.

why are we spending money on this garbage when we could be colonizing other planets

It would be equally productive to colonize the Saharan dessert. I'm being serious.

No it wouldn't, if you made the sahara productive it'd be taken over by niggers who claimed you stole its natural wealth from them

mars is better

>mars is better
Mars cannot host life. We have nothing to gain from it other than bragging rights. It's a very dangerous waste of time. We should be putting all efforts into developing rocket technology.

>poo york times

>>>infowars.com

>implying scientists gave SUSY much weight in recent years anyway

> no new science left to discover that will actually impact the daily lives of people
how would you know? What have discovered?

>physics
Not a science.

How the actual fuck do you study dark matter if nothing you invent can perceive it?

>quasiparticle
>odderon

They're really grasping at straws here.
There haven't been any real advances in decades so they have to resort to hyping the smallest discoveries or complete speculation.

It's because the LHC basically managed the worst nightmare of physicists; it validated the standing tenets of the standard model without unveiling any new physics in the process - while ruling out the theories that have had the most theoretical work for the past ~40 years over a wide range of the probability space. Now we're groping in the dark for where our knowledge of physics is incomplete, and particle accelerators up to the LHC's power seem to have, at best, a limited capacity to illuminate.

>I know what will actually impact the daily lives of people
No, you do not.

>I know what can and cannot host life.
Do, you do not.

>How the actual fuck do you study dark matter if nothing you invent can perceive it?
How do you suggest it exists if you haven't already perceived it?
Answer: You observe that the data doesn't agree with the theory.
There are two avenues to pursue from here.
1) Find the flaw in the theory.
2) Trust the theory and hypothesize a "god of the gaps" that must be creating the discrepancy between the data and the theory.
How long do you pursue option 2 without success until you start considering option 1?

>supersymmetry btfo

Why do quantum computers work then?

...

The modern understanding is that M-theory (i.e 11D theory with M2 & M5 branes) is just another maximally decompactified background, like the other 5. It isn't more fundamental than the others. Some people, however, still use the term M-theory for a more fundamental theory unifying all the string theories, and the 11D membrane theory, and AdS/CFT and Matrix theory for ALL backgrounds, but that fundamental theory might not involve branes directly.

>cruel quantized laughter in distance

pls explen.

im trien