Comments on: Hunting the Higgs is not a (D)Zero Sum Game http://asymptotia.com/2007/06/04/hunting-the-higgs-is-not-a-dzero-sum-game/ Sun, 20 Jul 2008 21:08:27 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1 By: Happy Higgs Hunters - Asymptotia http://asymptotia.com/2007/06/04/hunting-the-higgs-is-not-a-dzero-sum-game/#comment-66059 Happy Higgs Hunters - Asymptotia Tue, 24 Jul 2007 22:01:38 +0000 http://asymptotia.com/2007/06/04/hunting-the-higgs-is-not-a-dzero-sum-game/#comment-66059 [...] There’s another article about the search for the Higgs particle, the recent rumour kerfuffle involving the Tevatron, and the upcoming LHC experiment at CERN. (See related articles at bottom of this post.) This time it is in the New York Times and it is by Dennis Overbye. There’s a bit of discussion about how the fact that there are physicists blogging about these topics tends to amplify some things that might not (or should not?) get amplified otherwise. I’ve nothing really to add to the discussion, except to say that it is far better written -showing better understanding of the science, and the scientific implications of the rumour- than the article in Slate, by James Owen Weatherall, that I criticizedin an earlier post . Ironically, Weatherall is a recently trained (in particle physics) scientist. Go figure. To be fair, Overbye has the benefit of a long wait for the rumours to die down and reality checks to be done (and lots of good journalistic experience under his belt, and maybe a bit more seniority to fight with his editors, if that was part of the issue for the Weatherall article), so we all hope Weatherall will get better with time. (Above right: A random collision event I grabbed from the DZero experiment.) [...] [...] There’s another article about the search for the Higgs particle, the recent rumour kerfuffle involving the Tevatron, and the upcoming LHC experiment at CERN. (See related articles at bottom of this post.) This time it is in the New York Times and it is by Dennis Overbye. There’s a bit of discussion about how the fact that there are physicists blogging about these topics tends to amplify some things that might not (or should not?) get amplified otherwise. I’ve nothing really to add to the discussion, except to say that it is far better written -showing better understanding of the science, and the scientific implications of the rumour- than the article in Slate, by James Owen Weatherall, that I criticizedin an earlier post . Ironically, Weatherall is a recently trained (in particle physics) scientist. Go figure. To be fair, Overbye has the benefit of a long wait for the rumours to die down and reality checks to be done (and lots of good journalistic experience under his belt, and maybe a bit more seniority to fight with his editors, if that was part of the issue for the Weatherall article), so we all hope Weatherall will get better with time. (Above right: A random collision event I grabbed from the DZero experiment.) [...]

]]> By: Science After Sunclipse http://asymptotia.com/2007/06/04/hunting-the-higgs-is-not-a-dzero-sum-game/#comment-66039 Science After Sunclipse Tue, 24 Jul 2007 16:46:14 +0000 http://asymptotia.com/2007/06/04/hunting-the-higgs-is-not-a-dzero-sum-game/#comment-66039 <strong>Overbye on Hunting the Higgs...</strong> Dennis Overbye has an article in today’s New York Times on the search for the Higgs boson, and naturally, I’ve got complaints about it. It’s a pretty good piece: Overbye can do good work (he went a little overboard looking for journa... Overbye on Hunting the Higgs…

Dennis Overbye has an article in today’s New York Times on the search for the Higgs boson, and naturally, I’ve got complaints about it. It’s a pretty good piece: Overbye can do good work (he went a little overboard looking for journa…

]]> By: Clifford http://asymptotia.com/2007/06/04/hunting-the-higgs-is-not-a-dzero-sum-game/#comment-53259 Clifford Tue, 12 Jun 2007 15:00:14 +0000 http://asymptotia.com/2007/06/04/hunting-the-higgs-is-not-a-dzero-sum-game/#comment-53259 In fact, Nima is so annoyed, and make such good points, I'll <a href="http://www.stevens-tech.edu/csw/cgi-bin/blogs/csw/?p=42#comment-4449" rel="nofollow" rel="nofollow">link to it</a> and also reproduce it: <blockquote> Hi James, Someone pointed out your slate article to me, and I have to say as your ex-undergrad advisor I was very disappointed. You got the physics 100% wrong, (which is all the more surprising to me given that I know you understand some subtle physics rather well). As some of the commenters above indicated, if there is anything at all to the D0 rumor, there is absolutely no way it can be the standard model higgs. It would instead be a remarkable indication of physics *beyond* the standard model, and would lead us to expect much more at the LHC, not less. One possible explanation might indeed be an MSSM higgs, though until there is an actual D0 paper and the details of the analysis are known one can only speculate; there is still a real chance that (like other significant excesses in the past) it will go away. BTW you say above that an MSSM higgs at 180 GeV isn’t plausible, but that is because you misunderstand: it is the SECOND Higgs of the MSSM, the one that is not the Standard Model Higgs, and 180 GeV is certainly OK for it’s mass. Your assertions to the contrary don’t change this fact; saying something with confidence doesn’t make it true. To add insult to (your) injury, if the D0 rumor turns out to be real, not only would we think that the LHC is more likely to see lots of extra new physics, even beyond confirming this second higgs, the LHC would also still be set to see the actual Standard Model higgs itself! So the entire logical structure of your article is completely wrong, indeed almost exactly the opposite of the truth. Of course in this bloggy, postmodern day and age, where people routinely pontificate on things they know nothing about, I suppose a little wild inaccuracy about physics in slate is a drop in the bucket. It is nonetheless irksome to me that the work of hundreds of amazingly talented experimental particle physicists gets characterized in such a profoundly incorrect way. They are charged now more than ever with moving fundamental physics forward, and are working around the clock to make it happen. They deserve a little fact-checking when you write about them. I strongly encourage you to do everything you can to set the record straight in this matter. Nima PS I will not be checking back here; I detest the blogosphere for reasons that this little fiasco make completely self-evident, and I have already wasted more time on this than it deserves. However I did feel the need to write something about it, especially since you invoked me as your ex-advisor, lest anyone get the impression that I condone this type of shoddy work in any way. </blockquote> And it is worth noting that ironically, the blog is the "Center for Science Writings" blog at the Stevens Institute for Technology. So some work needed there it seems.... -cvj In fact, Nima is so annoyed, and make such good points, I’ll link to it and also reproduce it:

Hi James,

Someone pointed out your slate article to me, and I have to say as your ex-undergrad advisor I was very disappointed. You got the physics 100% wrong, (which is all the more surprising to me given that I know you understand some subtle physics rather well). As some of the commenters above indicated, if there is anything at all to the D0 rumor, there is absolutely no way it can be the standard model higgs. It would instead be a remarkable indication of physics *beyond* the standard model, and would lead us to expect much more at the LHC, not less. One possible explanation might indeed be an MSSM higgs, though until there is an actual D0 paper and the details of the analysis are known one can only speculate; there is still a real chance that (like other significant excesses in the past) it will go away. BTW you say above that an MSSM higgs at 180 GeV isn’t plausible, but that is because you misunderstand: it is the SECOND Higgs of the MSSM, the one that is not the Standard Model Higgs, and 180 GeV is certainly OK for it’s mass. Your assertions to the contrary don’t change this fact; saying something with confidence doesn’t make it true.
To add insult to (your) injury, if the D0 rumor turns out to be real, not only would we think that the LHC is more likely to see lots of extra new physics, even beyond confirming this second higgs, the LHC would also still be set to see the actual Standard Model higgs itself! So the entire logical structure of your article is completely wrong, indeed almost exactly the opposite of the truth.

Of course in this bloggy, postmodern day and age, where people routinely pontificate on things they know nothing about, I suppose a little wild inaccuracy about physics in slate is a drop in the bucket. It is nonetheless irksome to me that the work of hundreds of amazingly talented experimental particle physicists gets characterized in such a profoundly incorrect way. They are charged now more than ever with moving fundamental physics forward, and are working around the clock to make it happen. They deserve a little fact-checking when you write about them. I strongly encourage you to do everything you can to set the record straight in this matter.

Nima

PS I will not be checking back here; I detest the blogosphere for reasons that this little fiasco make completely self-evident, and I have already wasted more time on this than it deserves. However I did feel the need to write something about it, especially since you invoked me as your ex-advisor, lest anyone get the impression that I condone this type of shoddy work in any way.

And it is worth noting that ironically, the blog is the “Center for Science Writings” blog at the Stevens Institute for Technology. So some work needed there it seems….

-cvj

]]> By: Clifford http://asymptotia.com/2007/06/04/hunting-the-higgs-is-not-a-dzero-sum-game/#comment-53255 Clifford Tue, 12 Jun 2007 14:49:30 +0000 http://asymptotia.com/2007/06/04/hunting-the-higgs-is-not-a-dzero-sum-game/#comment-53255 Gosh..I had not noticed that... It is a bit sad and frustrating, really. Thanks, -cvj Gosh..I had not noticed that… It is a bit sad and frustrating, really.

Thanks,

-cvj

]]> By: anon http://asymptotia.com/2007/06/04/hunting-the-higgs-is-not-a-dzero-sum-game/#comment-53189 anon Tue, 12 Jun 2007 10:13:34 +0000 http://asymptotia.com/2007/06/04/hunting-the-higgs-is-not-a-dzero-sum-game/#comment-53189 As for writing to offer an informed view, you might first want to look at the comment thread at <a href="http://www.stevens-tech.edu/csw/cgi-bin/blogs/csw/?p=42" rel="nofollow">James Owen Weatherall</a>'s blog, where even after being criticized in rather strong terms by Nima he remains belligerently unapologetic.... As for writing to offer an informed view, you might first want to look at the comment thread at James Owen Weatherall’s blog, where even after being criticized in rather strong terms by Nima he remains belligerently unapologetic….

]]> By: Clifford http://asymptotia.com/2007/06/04/hunting-the-higgs-is-not-a-dzero-sum-game/#comment-53003 Clifford Mon, 11 Jun 2007 16:33:20 +0000 http://asymptotia.com/2007/06/04/hunting-the-higgs-is-not-a-dzero-sum-game/#comment-53003 Would they listen, I wonder.... Might not be too late to send something, I would say. You never know. -cvj Would they listen, I wonder….

Might not be too late to send something, I would say. You never know.

-cvj

]]> By: John Branch http://asymptotia.com/2007/06/04/hunting-the-higgs-is-not-a-dzero-sum-game/#comment-53001 John Branch Mon, 11 Jun 2007 16:27:06 +0000 http://asymptotia.com/2007/06/04/hunting-the-higgs-is-not-a-dzero-sum-game/#comment-53001 I wonder whether anyone has submitted a letter to the editor at Slate to offer a more informed view of the matter. If I weren't coming at this nearly a week late (as usual) and short of time, I'd do it myself. I wonder whether anyone has submitted a letter to the editor at Slate to offer a more informed view of the matter. If I weren’t coming at this nearly a week late (as usual) and short of time, I’d do it myself.

]]> By: And now about cancer! « Random (not i.i.d.) Thoughts http://asymptotia.com/2007/06/04/hunting-the-higgs-is-not-a-dzero-sum-game/#comment-51730 And now about cancer! « Random (not i.i.d.) Thoughts Wed, 06 Jun 2007 22:15:14 +0000 http://asymptotia.com/2007/06/04/hunting-the-higgs-is-not-a-dzero-sum-game/#comment-51730 [...] And now about cancer! Posted in Uncategorized by cowgonemad on the June 6th, 2007 Well, the thing I am really wondering about with the Higgs search rumor mill discussion (see e.g. here, here, here or here), is that these collaborations don’t care for attention in the media. I believe, there are quite a few news stories around about how to cure cancer or aids (see e.g. here or here, I used google for these links). At best knowledge, these stories get to the media, cause some attention of the people to the problem, maybe cause some head shaking (like “This cannot be true” or “I already heard that 2 years ago and nothing happened.”) And everybody continues with their daily routine. [...] [...] And now about cancer! Posted in Uncategorized by cowgonemad on the June 6th, 2007 Well, the thing I am really wondering about with the Higgs search rumor mill discussion (see e.g. here, here, here or here), is that these collaborations don’t care for attention in the media. I believe, there are quite a few news stories around about how to cure cancer or aids (see e.g. here or here, I used google for these links). At best knowledge, these stories get to the media, cause some attention of the people to the problem, maybe cause some head shaking (like “This cannot be true” or “I already heard that 2 years ago and nothing happened.”) And everybody continues with their daily routine. [...]

]]> By: The Higgs rumor spreads again « A Quantum Diaries Survivor http://asymptotia.com/2007/06/04/hunting-the-higgs-is-not-a-dzero-sum-game/#comment-51287 The Higgs rumor spreads again « A Quantum Diaries Survivor Tue, 05 Jun 2007 08:05:48 +0000 http://asymptotia.com/2007/06/04/hunting-the-higgs-is-not-a-dzero-sum-game/#comment-51287 [...] Posted by dorigo in physics, Blogroll, italian blogs, politics, science, personal, news, internet. trackback The recent  rumor about a possible MSSM Higgs signal, which made its way on electronicmedia starting from  a comment on this blog after having been passed mouth to ear for a while among HEP experimentalists, has now spread wide through blogs (for instance in Not Even Wrong , in the Arcadian Functor, in Charm & c. ( twice), in Asymptotia , in the Quantum Pontiff, in Bad Astronomy, and apologies to those I missed), online journals ( Slate, the Center for Science Writings), and the like.  [...] [...] Posted by dorigo in physics, Blogroll, italian blogs, politics, science, personal, news, internet. trackback The recent  rumor about a possible MSSM Higgs signal, which made its way on electronicmedia starting from  a comment on this blog after having been passed mouth to ear for a while among HEP experimentalists, has now spread wide through blogs (for instance in Not Even Wrong , in the Arcadian Functor, in Charm & c. ( twice), in Asymptotia , in the Quantum Pontiff, in Bad Astronomy, and apologies to those I missed), online journals ( Slate, the Center for Science Writings), and the like.  [...]

]]>