And Then There Were Five
« on: April 08, 2021, 06:09:22 AM »
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/56643677

Evidence building for a fifth force of nature although it all sounds a bit complicated and I’m not sure how it changes or refines our understanding of reality
"On a very clear and chilly day it is possible to see Lighthouse Beach from Lovers Point and vice versa...Upon looking into the telescope I can see children running in and out of the water, splashing and playing. I can see people sun bathing at the shore
- An excerpt from the account of the Bishop Experiment. My emphasis

Re: And Then There Were Five
« Reply #1 on: April 08, 2021, 01:46:03 PM »
probably just systematic error (these things nearly always are), but it's still an exciting result. if another independent experiment confirms, that'll be a huge step.
I have visited from prestigious research institutions of the highest caliber, to which only our administrator holds with confidence.

*

Offline Rama Set

  • *
  • Posts: 7692
  • Round and round...
    • View Profile
Re: And Then There Were Five
« Reply #2 on: April 08, 2021, 03:40:42 PM »
probably just systematic error (these things nearly always are), but it's still an exciting result. if another independent experiment confirms, that'll be a huge step.

Do you have a sense of what they need to get from a 4 sigma confidence to 5 sigma?
Th*rk is the worst person on this website.

Re: And Then There Were Five
« Reply #3 on: April 08, 2021, 04:22:33 PM »
probably just systematic error (these things nearly always are), but it's still an exciting result. if another independent experiment confirms, that'll be a huge step.

Do you have a sense of what they need to get from a 4 sigma confidence to 5 sigma?

totally take this with a grain of salt since i'm an astro dude and not a particle physics dude, but usually it entails either more data, or more independent experiments. the former is only feasible if more data will substantially increase your signal-to-noise ratio, and i'm guessing they've basically maxed that out with the fermilab experiment (i.e., maybe they could run it for another billion years to get to 5σ, but ain't nobody got time for that). the latter is almost certainly the way to go.



basically you can either try to shrink the error bars (more data), or you can add more data points (more experiments). shrinking the error bars is probably not feasible, so they'll need to add more data points with new experiments. lol of course sometimes that only deepens the mystery, like the current tension between independent measurements of the hubble constant.



more than likely, one of these sets of measurements is being affected by an as-yet-unknown systematic error. for example, if the planck data is systematically underestimating H_0, then these measurements may in fact completely agree. so sigma doesn't tell the full story here since sigma is "unaware" of systematics. the same could be true for the brookhaven/fermilab results. unknown systematics may be causing them to overestimate a_μ, and no new physics are needed to put these results back in line with the theoretical predictions.

systematic error is a real asshole.
I have visited from prestigious research institutions of the highest caliber, to which only our administrator holds with confidence.

Offline Action80

  • *
  • Posts: 344
    • View Profile
Re: And Then There Were Five
« Reply #4 on: April 09, 2021, 12:07:20 PM »
"Prof Ben Allanach, from Cambridge University, who was not involved with the latest effort, said: "My Spidey sense is tingling and telling me that this is going to be real." -

They left off the words cool bs.