Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
I won't bet against you. Indirect experimental evidence has its center value below the LEP limit, which is 114. 116 GeV really looks for the moment to be the best guess even without the renormalization argument.

I don't assume string theory to be a physical theory at all, as they can always shift their parameters in a way, that any (non)observation is explained.
My boss completely dislikes Susy, but we have another prof who is now working since decades to prove it (without success).

It may well be, that the LHC finds only a Higgs (and only after quite a long time of running, when it is so low) and nothing else. I'm not at all sure, there is something else, although there are some less compelling hints. However, Susy and some other models should really be dead, if LHC finds nothing.
I only wanted to give you an overview over the reasons why people are searching at all for other things and not simply sit down and say it is not worth to try, because anyhow nothing else than a complete SM can be expected.

Der Amerikaner ist die Orchidee unter den Menschen
Volker Pispers

by Martin (weiser.mensch(at)googlemail.com) on Sun Feb 24th, 2008 at 08:31:02 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Oh, it is definitely worth a try, I never implied otherwise. In fact, given the accesibility of the energy range and the necessarily ad-hoc nature of the various models of the Higgs sector, it would be unforgivable not to try.

If the SM Higgs is found, with no evidence of physics beyond the SM below 1TeV (including "corrections" due to physics at higher energies), I think it will be safe to say that theoretical high energy physics will have "died of success". There would be no strong case for higher-energy accelerators, leaving aside how difficult it would be to build something to probe the 10TeV range.

We have met the enemy, and he is us — Pogo

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Sun Feb 24th, 2008 at 09:44:27 AM EST
[ Parent ]


Occasional Series