Monday, April 8, 2024

Bad Theory

A new preprint, which bogged down for 52 days in the approval process for some reason, represents the worst of stale and discredited approaches to beyond the Standard Model physics.

Both WIMP dark matter and SUSY are beyond the Standard Model theoretical proposals that have failed, and have no viable candidates that have any connection to the theoretical and experimental considerations that drove them. Right handed neutrinos are not a very attractive theoretical model. The notion that the mass of the Higgs boson is a problem in some way, is backwards. If it doesn't look right, then the way we are framing the issue is wrong, because it is what it is. Neutrino mass is indeed a puzzle, but this author is barking up the wrong trees in general and shouldn't be trusted to have insights that are anything other than counterproductive about any of them.
Quantum Field Theory (QFT) forms the bedrock of the Standard Model (SM) of particle physics, a powerful framework that delineates the fundamental constituents and interactions of the universe. However, the SM's narrative is incomplete, as it conspicuously fails to account for several empirical phenomena that challenge our current understanding of particle physics. This review meticulously examines three paramount anomalies that elude SM predictions: the elusive nature of dark matter, the Higgs boson's anomalously low mass, and the intricate puzzle of neutrino masses. Through a critical analysis, it delves into the forefront of theoretical advancements proposed to bridge these gaps, notably the Weakly Interacting Massive Particles (WIMPs), Supersymmetry (SUSY), and the intriguing hypothesis of right-handed neutrinos. By synthesizing current research and theoretical models, this review not only elucidates these profound mysteries but also underscores the imperative for a more comprehensive and unified theory of particle physics, setting the stage for future discoveries and theoretical breakthroughs.
Dhananjay Saikumar, "Exploring the Frontiers: Challenges and Theories Beyond the Standard Model" arXiv:2404.03666 (February 16, 2024).


Mitchell said...

The author is doing a PhD in machine learning, but spent eight months at CERN three years ago. He also seems to have uploaded, at the same time as this one, a short paper on atomic microscopy, which contains some measurements but which doesn't say where they were performed. So these papers might be trying to salvage something from a Masters that went wrong, and don't reflect an ongoing research program.

andrew said...