There's a good reason why scientists double-check their data.

Large Hadron Collider's new 'particle' was just a fluke
Sorry, folks: CERN didn't mean to get your hopes up. Researchers havedetermined that Large Hadron Collider data suggesting a possible new particle was really just a "statistical fluctuation." Additional data collected over the course of the past several months reduced the unusual diphoton "bump" to a significance of 2 sigma, or well below the 5 sigma needed for a discovery to be considered authentic. It's just unusual that scientists saw a blip like this at both the ATLAS and CMS experiments, ATLAS' Dave Charlton explains to Scientific American.

Not that CERN sees the LHC's post-reboot operations as a waste. Its teams have collected roughly five times more data in 2016 than they obtained last year, and have spotted the elusive Higgs boson with higher certainty than they had the first time around. Moreover, the LHC is exceeding its hoped-for specs. It's surpassing its intended luminosity (collisions per second), which should help it spot even the rarest physics events at extremely high energy levels. While it may take a long time for results to emerge, the collider could be well on its way to making new discoveries that hold up under scrutiny.

https://www.engadget.com/2016/08/07/large-hadron-collider-new-particle-finding-was-fluke/

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Great stuff Timojin, science in progress, nothing more, nothing less.
The LHC of course is one of the greatest scientific experiments ever built and undertaken.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

So for how long we were kept in the dark withe the over one year truth ?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

And thats not the only thing...

 

Can someone explain this 2 sigma? how I understand 2 sigma, is that it means, there is a confidence that the result is 97.73% REAL, Why is this 750 bump now being dismissed by everyone?

 

2- sigma will be around 95%. Pl refer to any standard text on standard deviations and sigma notions.

 

Great question!

For everyday purposes, 97.73% confidence is very good. But for something as big as announcing a new particle discovery, a 2% chance for a false positive is unacceptably high. Indeed, since there have been thousands of experiments in the history of high-energy particle physics, it's likely that there have been dozens or even hundreds of false two-sigma positives that came and went without notice. Instead, the folks at the LHC and CERN look for confidence levels so high that they can safely say there has never been a false positive. Five-sigma is the arbitrary-but-common standard for this.

Also, note that for a real effect, we would expect the confidence interval to keep improving as more data is taken. If an initially high confidence has shrunk to two-sigma, that suggests that the original signal was exactly the sort of coincidence that the five-sigma threshold is meant to sift out, and that the confidence will continue to shrink as data is collected.

 

We were not kept in the dark, nor was anything less then any honest appraisel afoot.
Just as I said, science is a discipline in continued progress and the gathering of evidence. That evidence has now showed that the first inference re "new particle" was wrong.
Religion on the other hand, has not seen the light nor progressed from its mythical beginnings for thousands of years. Sad.

 

What is actually "Sad.", is that the same Member persists in introducing "Religion" into Thread after Thread after Thr.....

 

Who's been kept in the dark? Someone said, "this data looks like we may have found a new particle." Someone else looked a little closer and said, "no, just statistical anomalies".

Sounds like science at work to me.

 

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Our friend timijon obviously has a religious agenda, as illustrated in many posts, an example as shown in the "Is Earthly Life Premature'thread.

In essence, his OP on face value, was OK...I mean of course science should double check, as indeed was the case here.....
but his follow up nonsense.....

 

Would you stop crying . You are the one who have an agenda. I would not be surprised if more then halve scientists are believers in God

 

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Stop having yourself on my friend....My only agenda is science, that which has pushed your magic spaghetti monster into oblivion.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

And yes, many scientists believe in god, but as scientists, they unlike you, do not let that belief get in the way of the scientific data and what it entails.
You know who is said to be the father of the BB? A Belgian priest named George La-Maitre....and of course the Catholic church has enough brains to have seen the need to recognise the BB and also by the way the theory of Evolution.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Sometimes when faced with the truth, some are just unable to handle it.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Paddoboy,

Almost all the rationale people who are atheist, they are atheist and continue to be so because they love their loved ones...

I sincerely request you not to bring the God again in your discussions unless some one explicitly posts that the science is BS and everything is created by the God. And here also you can safely ignore such poster instead of arguing. Any critical view about science and you start shouting.....God God God..

 

On the OP, you can understand human psychology that it is very difficult to retract something as huge as this, unless extremely cornered by facts or by criticism. Those who claimed would doubly ensure and work hard to see if their claim could survive, that may have taken a year or so. You can imagine their embarrassment, so to save on that possibly this delay.

 

In many cases particularly on this forum, it is simply stating the truth and factual...you know that, I know that, and those that already have you on ignore know that.

 

That of course is just your unsupported assumption, as well as timojin.....Like the BICEP2 experiment, the original hypothesis, and results were simply over turned by the same, and other mainstream professionals, after further research, investigation and receipt of more data.
That's how science operates and will continue to operate.
You appear simarilly blinkered as timojin, and have much to learn.

 

http://www.sciforums.com/threads/lhc-previously-undiscovered-particle.157324/

http://journals.aps.org/prl/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevLett.116.151805

750 GeV Diphoton Excess May Not Imply a 750 GeV Resonance:

ABSTRACT
We discuss nonstandard interpretations of the 750 GeV diphoton excess recently reported by the ATLAS and CMS Collaborations which do notinvolve a new, relatively broad resonance with a mass near 750 GeV. Instead, we consider the sequential cascade decay of a much heavier, possibly quite narrow, resonance into two photons along with one or more additional particles. The resulting diphoton invariant mass signal is generically rather broad, as suggested by the data. We examine three specific event topologies—the “antler,” the “sandwich,” and the two-step cascade decay—and show that they all can provide a good fit to the observed published data. In each case, we delineate the preferred mass parameter space selected by the best fit. In spite of the presence of extra particles in the final state, the measured diphoton pT spectrum is moderate due to its anticorrelation with the diphoton invariant mass. We comment on the future prospects of discriminating with higher statistics between our scenarios, as well as from more conventional interpretations.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

yep, the scientific methodology in action!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

LHC is by far the most expensive experiment ever and its contributions to science are questionable. For example expenses to find Higgs boson were around 13 billions EUR and I dont see any significant impact on physics or technology after it was found.

 

Hang the expense...It advances science and our knowledge of what makes up all matter, and in that respect also advances technology in many areas for the populace in general.
We also have short sighted people saying that about space exploration etc, and they are just as wrong.
It will, and already has had many benefits for mankind........Cancer treatment with radio therapy, many other kinds of medical imaging and procedures, CAT scans, MRI's etc etc, Nanotechnology, computing, the World Wide web, further knowledge of the particle model, and updates, and much much more.

In fact my friend, if it wasn't for science in general, the space age and machines like the LHC and others, you would still be swinging in the trees.