A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Astronomy and Astrophysics » Astronomy Misc
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

One possible yet unobserved energy state of the meson t-t_bar couldbe near 126 GeV/c^2 ?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old July 5th 12, 09:30 AM posted to sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics.particle,sci.physics,sci.astro
mathematician
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 150
Default One possible yet unobserved energy state of the meson t-t_bar couldbe near 126 GeV/c^2 ?

About recent news of finding (Cern's LHC) a new particle near 120 GeV/
c^2 - 130 GeV/c^2 :

The finding is not Higgs particle in this time?

One possible yet unobserved energy state of the meson t-t_bar could be
near 126 GeV/c^2 ?

(t-quark = top-quark).

Best Regards,

Hannu Poropudas
  #2  
Old July 7th 12, 03:50 AM posted to sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics.particle,sci.physics,sci.astro
Tom Roberts
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 344
Default One possible yet unobserved energy state of the meson t-t_barcould be near 126 GeV/c^2 ?

On 7/5/12 7/5/12 3:30 AM, mathematician wrote:
About recent news of finding (Cern's LHC) a new particle near 120 GeV/c^2 - 130 GeV/c^2 :
The finding is not Higgs particle in this time?


Many/most people think it is the Higgs boson, but there is no definitive proof
of that. From its decay modes, it is definitely a boson (i.e. integer spin).


One possible yet unobserved energy state of the meson t-t_bar could be
near 126 GeV/c^2 ? (t-quark = top-quark).


No. 125 GeV/c^2 is far below the t-t_bar threshold; it is well below the t-quark
mass of 173 GeV/c^2.

Moreover, this is HIGHLY unlikely to be any sort of meson, as
a) the production cross-section is far below those of other
strong-interaction particles
b) it is FAR above threshold for other q-q_bar mesons

Within the standard model, the Higgs is the only choice, and both the production
cross-section and the decay modes are consistent with that; beyond the standard
model there are many alternatives....


Tom Roberts
  #3  
Old July 9th 12, 07:34 AM posted to sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics.particle,sci.physics,sci.astro
mathematician[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10
Default One possible yet unobserved energy state of the meson t-t_barcould be near 126 GeV/c^2 ?

On 7 heinä, 05:50, Tom Roberts wrote:
On 7/5/12 7/5/12 * 3:30 AM, mathematician wrote:

About recent news of finding (Cern's LHC) a new particle near 120 GeV/c^2 - 130 GeV/c^2 :
The finding is not Higgs particle in this time?


Many/most people think it is the Higgs boson, but there is no definitive proof
of that. From its decay modes, it is definitely a boson (i.e. integer spin).

One possible yet unobserved energy state of the meson t-t_bar could be
near 126 GeV/c^2 ? (t-quark = top-quark).


No. 125 GeV/c^2 is far below the t-t_bar threshold; it is well below the t-quark
mass of 173 GeV/c^2.

Moreover, this is HIGHLY unlikely to be any sort of meson, as
* *a) the production cross-section is far below those of other
* * * strong-interaction particles
* *b) it is FAR above threshold for other q-q_bar mesons

Within the standard model, the Higgs is the only choice, and both the production
cross-section and the decay modes are consistent with that; beyond the standard
model there are many alternatives....

Tom Roberts


Presently unknown
(t,t_bar) mesons are classified with
I = isospin, J = total angular momentun, P = parity and C = C-parity:

J(PC) = 0(-+), 2(-+), 4(-+), ... are called eta_t mesons, I = 0.
J=0 is specially interesting at this time.
Masses of these mesons are unknown at the moment ?

J(PC) = 0(++), 1(++), 2(++), ... are called X_t mesons, I = 0.
J=0 is specially interesting at this time.
Masses of these mesons are unknown at the moment ?

These two (J=0) should be investigated before we could identify
the Higgs particle to mass 120 GEV/c^2 -130 GeV/c^2 which
was at the Cern news presently ?

Other (t,t_bar) mesons a
J(PC) = 1(+-), 3(+-), 5(+-), ... are called h_t mesons, I = 0.
Masses of these mesons are unknown at the moment ?

J(PC) = 1(--), 2(--), 3(--), ... are called theta-mesons, I = 0.
Masses of these mesons are unknown at the moment ?

Best Regards,

Hannu Poropudas
  #4  
Old July 9th 12, 04:25 PM posted to sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics.particle,sci.physics,sci.astro
Tom Roberts
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 344
Default One possible yet unobserved energy state of the meson t-t_barcould be near 126 GeV/c^2 ?

On 7/9/12 7/9/12 1:34 AM, mathematician wrote:
On 7 heinä, 05:50, Tom Roberts wrote:
No. 125 GeV/c^2 is far below the t-t_bar threshold; it is well below the t-quark
mass of 173 GeV/c^2.


Presently unknown
(t,t_bar) mesons are classified with
I = isospin, J = total angular momentun, P = parity and C = C-parity:

J(PC) = 0(-+), 2(-+), 4(-+), ... are called eta_t mesons, I = 0.
J=0 is specially interesting at this time.
Masses of these mesons are unknown at the moment ? [...]


Yes, their masses are unknown. But as I said before, they must have masses above
2*173 GeV/c^2, which rules them out as the bump at 126 GeV/c^2.

In addition, one would expect such mesons to be produced with a
strong-interaction cross-section, which would be much larger than that observed
for the bump at 126 GeV/c^2. The production cross-section of that bump is
consistent with the SM Higgs (i.e. an electroweak coupling).


Tom Roberts

  #5  
Old July 10th 12, 06:47 AM posted to sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics.particle,sci.physics,sci.astro
mathematician[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10
Default One possible yet unobserved energy state of the meson t-t_barcould be near 126 GeV/c^2 ?

On 9 heinä, 18:25, Tom Roberts wrote:
On 7/9/12 7/9/12 * 1:34 AM, mathematician wrote:

On 7 heinä, 05:50, Tom Roberts wrote:
No. 125 GeV/c^2 is far below the t-t_bar threshold; it is well below the t-quark
mass of 173 GeV/c^2.


Presently unknown
(t,t_bar) mesons are classified with
I = isospin, J = total angular momentun, P = parity and C = C-parity:


J(PC) = 0(-+), 2(-+), 4(-+), ... are called eta_t mesons, I = 0.
J=0 is specially interesting at this time.
Masses of these mesons are unknown at the moment ? * [...]


Yes, their masses are unknown. But as I said before, they must have masses above
2*173 GeV/c^2, which rules them out as the bump at 126 GeV/c^2.

In addition, one would expect such mesons to be produced with a
strong-interaction cross-section, which would be much larger than that observed
for the bump at 126 GeV/c^2. The production cross-section of that bump is
consistent with the SM Higgs (i.e. an electroweak coupling).

Tom Roberts


2*57.68 GeV/c^2 = 115.36 GeV/c^2. Is there some measurements wrong in
your 2*173 GeV/c^2 ?

I would expect m_t = 115 GeV/c^2 - 126 GeV/^2 .

Hannu
  #6  
Old July 10th 12, 06:52 AM posted to sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics.particle,sci.physics,sci.astro
mathematician[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10
Default One possible yet unobserved energy state of the meson t-t_barcould be near 126 GeV/c^2 ?

On 10 heinä, 08:47, mathematician wrote:
On 9 heinä, 18:25, Tom Roberts wrote:









On 7/9/12 7/9/12 * 1:34 AM, mathematician wrote:


On 7 heinä, 05:50, Tom Roberts wrote:
No. 125 GeV/c^2 is far below the t-t_bar threshold; it is well below the t-quark
mass of 173 GeV/c^2.


Presently unknown
(t,t_bar) mesons are classified with
I = isospin, J = total angular momentun, P = parity and C = C-parity:


J(PC) = 0(-+), 2(-+), 4(-+), ... are called eta_t mesons, I = 0.
J=0 is specially interesting at this time.
Masses of these mesons are unknown at the moment ? * [...]


Yes, their masses are unknown. But as I said before, they must have masses above
2*173 GeV/c^2, which rules them out as the bump at 126 GeV/c^2.


In addition, one would expect such mesons to be produced with a
strong-interaction cross-section, which would be much larger than that observed
for the bump at 126 GeV/c^2. The production cross-section of that bump is
consistent with the SM Higgs (i.e. an electroweak coupling).


Tom Roberts


2*57.68 GeV/c^2 = 115.36 GeV/c^2. Is there some measurements wrong in
your 2*173 GeV/c^2 ?

I would expect m_t = 115 GeV/c^2 - 126 GeV/^2 .

Hannu


Correction: I would expect 2*m_t = 115 GeV/c^2 - 126 GeV/^2 .
  #7  
Old July 10th 12, 06:50 PM posted to sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics.particle,sci.physics,sci.astro
Tom Roberts
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 344
Default One possible yet unobserved energy state of the meson t-t_barcould be near 126 GeV/c^2 ?

On 7/10/12 7/10/12 - 12:52 AM, mathematician wrote:
On 10 heinä, 08:47, mathematician wrote:
On 9 heinä, 18:25, Tom Roberts wrote:









On 7/9/12 7/9/12 1:34 AM, mathematician wrote:


On 7 heinä, 05:50, Tom Roberts wrote:
No. 125 GeV/c^2 is far below the t-t_bar threshold; it is well below the t-quark
mass of 173 GeV/c^2.


Presently unknown
(t,t_bar) mesons are classified with
I = isospin, J = total angular momentun, P = parity and C = C-parity:


J(PC) = 0(-+), 2(-+), 4(-+), ... are called eta_t mesons, I = 0.
J=0 is specially interesting at this time.
Masses of these mesons are unknown at the moment ? [...]


Yes, their masses are unknown. But as I said before, they must have masses above
2*173 GeV/c^2, which rules them out as the bump at 126 GeV/c^2.


In addition, one would expect such mesons to be produced with a
strong-interaction cross-section, which would be much larger than that observed
for the bump at 126 GeV/c^2. The production cross-section of that bump is
consistent with the SM Higgs (i.e. an electroweak coupling).


Tom Roberts


2*57.68 GeV/c^2 = 115.36 GeV/c^2. Is there some measurements wrong in
your 2*173 GeV/c^2 ?

I would expect m_t = 115 GeV/c^2 - 126 GeV/^2 .

Hannu


Correction: I would expect 2*m_t = 115 GeV/c^2 - 126 GeV/^2 .


Your "expectation" is irrelevant. The mass of the top quark has been measured by
multiple groups, and the current best value from direct measurements is
173.5+-0.6+-0.8 GeV/c^2. Its full width is 2.0+-0.6 GeV/c^2.

[Values from http://pdg.lbl.gov/2012/tables/contents_tables.html ]


Tom Roberts


  #8  
Old July 11th 12, 06:20 AM posted to sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics.particle,sci.physics,sci.astro
mathematician[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10
Default One possible yet unobserved energy state of the meson t-t_barcould be near 126 GeV/c^2 ?

On 10 heinä, 20:50, Tom Roberts wrote:
On 7/10/12 7/10/12 - 12:52 AM, mathematician wrote:









On 10 heinä, 08:47, mathematician wrote:
On 9 heinä, 18:25, Tom Roberts wrote:


On 7/9/12 7/9/12 * 1:34 AM, mathematician wrote:


On 7 heinä, 05:50, Tom Roberts wrote:
No. 125 GeV/c^2 is far below the t-t_bar threshold; it is well below the t-quark
mass of 173 GeV/c^2.


Presently unknown
(t,t_bar) mesons are classified with
I = isospin, J = total angular momentun, P = parity and C = C-parity:


J(PC) = 0(-+), 2(-+), 4(-+), ... are called eta_t mesons, I = 0.
J=0 is specially interesting at this time.
Masses of these mesons are unknown at the moment ? * [...]


Yes, their masses are unknown. But as I said before, they must have masses above
2*173 GeV/c^2, which rules them out as the bump at 126 GeV/c^2.


In addition, one would expect such mesons to be produced with a
strong-interaction cross-section, which would be much larger than that observed
for the bump at 126 GeV/c^2. The production cross-section of that bump is
consistent with the SM Higgs (i.e. an electroweak coupling).


Tom Roberts


2*57.68 GeV/c^2 = 115.36 GeV/c^2. Is there some measurements wrong in
your 2*173 GeV/c^2 ?


I would expect m_t = 115 GeV/c^2 - 126 GeV/^2 .


Hannu


Correction: I would expect 2*m_t = 115 GeV/c^2 - 126 GeV/^2 .


Your "expectation" is irrelevant. The mass of the top quark has been measured by
multiple groups, and the current best value from direct measurements is
173.5+-0.6+-0.8 GeV/c^2. Its full width is 2.0+-0.6 GeV/c^2.

* * * * [Values fromhttp://pdg.lbl.gov/2012/tables/contents_tables.html]

Tom Roberts


You have possible found bunch of t-quarks, namely (t,t,t) ?

3*m_t = 3*57.68 GeV/c^2 = 173.04 GeV/c^2

I refer my old writings in sci.physics from the year 1992 below:

Newsgroups: sci.physics
From:
Date: 3 Jan 92 10:06:50 GMT
Local: Fri, Jan 3 1992 1:06 pm
Subject: Quark Masses
Print | Individual message | Show original | Report this message |
Find messages by this author
I put while ago an E-Mail comment about masses of the six quarks in
this
newsgroup:
X-News: tnclus sci.physics:6727
From:
Subject: Quark Questions
Date: Fri, 20 Dec 1991 11:06:20 GMT

and I want to repeat it now under own subject name.
Does any of you have any comments about it ?
I have invented (in year 1988) one strange quark formula
(which I sent to prof. Esko Suhonen in autumn 1988, to Arkhimedes
19.7.1989
and to Physical Review Letters 11.1.1990, (it was not published,
because it
was pure formula and the paper did not include explanations)):
3 3 1/2
m = (m / m )* ( a * h / (2*P) ) / ( G * c ) )
K I J k F
m = m or m or m
I electron u-lepton tau-lepton
2 2 2
= (0,511 MeV / c , 105,6 MeV / c , 1786 MeV / c )
m = m or m or m
J electron u-lepton tau-lepton
P = 3,1415927...
-34
h/(2P) = 1,0546 * 10 Js , (Planck's constant / (2P) ), (SI-
units)
-62 3
G = 1,43582 * 10 J m , (Fermi's constant), (SI-units)
F
8 -1
c = 2,79979 * 10 ms , (Speed of light in vacuum ), (SI-units)
-3
1. a = 7,297 * 10 , (Fine structure constant), (dimensioless)
k
2. a = 11,1 , (empirical constant, which is found by fixing it to
the
k supposed mass of bottom quark
2
m = 4,72 GeV / c , from the standard
model.
b-quark
This formula could give constituent or current masses of six quarks
(and possible six other larger strange masses).
2 2 2
Case 1. would give: 7,16 MeV / c , 121,0 MeV / c , 1,479 GeV / c
2 2 2
Case 2. would give: 279 MeV / c , 4,72 GeV / c , 57,68 GeV / c
+ six strange masses:
2 2 2
Case 1. would give: 423,0 GeV / c , 5,17 TeV / c , 87,4 TeV / c
2 2 2
Case 2. would give: 16,50 TeV / c , 201,6 TeV / c , 3410 TeV / c
(not rounded values)
Case 1. starts by finding the energy point, where weak interaction
has equal
coupling strength than electro-magnetic interaction, by using Yakawa-
type weak
interaction potential energy. Exponential term in this potential is
approximated to be close unity, because of the large rest masses of
three weak
interaction bosons and because interaction distance is supposed to be
small.
This energy is then "ad-hoc" multiplied by all possible rest mass
ratios of
known three leptons (electron, u-lepton and tau-lepton).
(This rough approximation is called "trivial unification" of weak and
electro-
magnetic interactions).
I don't recommend to use these mass values at the moment, because
I had no chance to investigate the question further after that time,
because
I there have been so busy in my work place during whole time.
Oulu - Finland 03.01. 1992 Hannu Poropudas
Message-ID:


Newsgroups: sci.physics
From:
Date: 17 Jan 92 09:32:19 GMT
Local: Fri, Jan 17 1992 12:32 pm
Subject: Quark Masses
Print | Individual message | Show original | Report this message |
Find messages by this author
In article (Date: 10 Jan 92)
(Bill C. Riemers) writes:
- Show quoted text -
We use here in Finland "," instead of "." , which seems to cause
incovenience
to you. I will use "." instead of "," in my future messages.
Let us start to investigate together this strange "quark formula".
I suggest that we should look and discuss first on this Yakava-type
potential
energy formula of weak-interaction (SI-units):
2
G * c E * E m * c
F 1 2 x
( --------- ) * (-------- ) * exp( - --------- * r )
2 4 (h/(2P))
(h/(2P)) r c
2 2
where E = m * c and E = m * c ,
1 1 2 2
m and m are masses of two weak-interacting particles (SI-units),
1 2
r is the distance between these particles, exp is usual elementary
exponential function,
m = m or m or m , (three Higgs bosons of weak-interaction),
x Z0 W+ W-
2 2
(80.6 (+- 0.4) GeV / c , 91.161 (+- 0.031) GeV / c ).
All other constants are defined in my Quark Masses message:


2
(little correction the m = 1784.1 (+2.7 , -3.6) GeV / c
tau-lepton

2
m = 105.658387 (+- 0.000034)
MeV / c
u-lepton

2
m = 0.51099906 (+- 0.00000015)
MeV / c
electron
(Particle Data Group 1990)).
I suggest that correctness and validity of this potential energy
formula
of weak-interaction should be checked first by experimental tests.
Reference cited:
Particle Data Group, 1990.
Review of Particle Properties,
Phys. Lett. B., Vol. 239, 12 April 1990.
Oulu - Finland 17.1.1992 Hannu Poropudas
Message-ID:

  #9  
Old July 11th 12, 04:55 PM posted to sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics.particle,sci.physics,sci.astro
Tom Roberts
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 344
Default One possible yet unobserved energy state of the meson t-t_barcould be near 126 GeV/c^2 ?

On 7/11/12 7/11/12 12:20 AM, mathematician wrote:
On 10 heinä, 20:50, Tom Roberts wrote:
The mass of the top quark has been measured by
multiple groups, and the current best value from direct measurements is
173.5+-0.6+-0.8 GeV/c^2. Its full width is 2.0+-0.6 GeV/c^2.
[Values from http://pdg.lbl.gov/2012/tables/contents_tables.html]


You have possible found bunch of t-quarks, namely (t,t,t) ?
I refer my old writings in sci.physics from the year 1992 below:


You need to get out more, read the literature, and move beyond 20-year-old nonsense.

The top quark is known and solid, within the standard model. You seem to be
attempting to discuss something else, so you cannot use that name for it,
whatever it is.


Tom Roberts


  #10  
Old July 12th 12, 08:53 AM posted to sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics.particle,sci.physics,sci.astro
mathematician[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10
Default One possible yet unobserved energy state of the meson t-t_barcould be near 126 GeV/c^2 ?

On 11 heinä, 18:55, Tom Roberts wrote:
On 7/11/12 7/11/12 * 12:20 AM, mathematician wrote:

On 10 heinä, 20:50, Tom Roberts wrote:
The mass of the top quark has been measured by
multiple groups, and the current best value from direct measurements is
173.5+-0.6+-0.8 GeV/c^2. Its full width is 2.0+-0.6 GeV/c^2.
* * * * *[Values fromhttp://pdg.lbl.gov/2012/tables/contents_tables.html]


You have possible found bunch of t-quarks, namely (t,t,t) ?
I refer my old writings in sci.physics from the year 1992 below:


You need to get out more, read the literature, and move beyond 20-year-old nonsense.

The top quark is known and solid, within the standard model. You seem to be
attempting to discuss something else, so you cannot use that name for it,
whatever it is.

Tom Roberts


Good Bye, Liers Club.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The sun energy source is not nuclear fusion, but magnetic fields from the center of the Galaxy. The sun converts energy to mass and not mass to energy. dan@@pixelphase.com Policy 5 March 24th 07 09:04 AM
The sun energy source is not nuclear fusion, but magnetic fields from the center of the Galaxy. The sun converts energy to mass and not mass to energy. dan@@pixelphase.com Astronomy Misc 1 March 10th 07 11:30 PM
The sun energy source is not nuclear fusion, but magnetic fields from the center of the Galaxy. The sun converts energy to mass and not mass to energy. [email protected] Misc 2 December 13th 06 02:15 PM
Planetary gathering unobserved Glenn Holliday Amateur Astronomy 7 December 12th 06 06:26 PM
State Granted Monopoly, the Root of All Evil or How *NOT* to Non-Settle Space By Holding the Assets for Ransom through State Force (State Terrorism) Royal Libertarian Policy 3 April 14th 05 06:42 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:45 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.