Today,
the favored theory for the next step beyond the standard model is
called supersymmetry (which is also the basis for string theory).
Supersymmetry predicts the existence of a “partner” particle for every
particle that we currently know. It doubles the number of elementary
particles of matter in nature. The theory is elegant mathematically, and
the particles whose existence it predicts might also explain the
universe’s unaccounted-for “dark matter.”
As a result, many researchers were confident that supersymmetry would
be experimentally validated soon after the Large Hadron Collider became
operational.
the favored theory for the next step beyond the standard model is
called supersymmetry (which is also the basis for string theory).
Supersymmetry predicts the existence of a “partner” particle for every
particle that we currently know. It doubles the number of elementary
particles of matter in nature. The theory is elegant mathematically, and
the particles whose existence it predicts might also explain the
universe’s unaccounted-for “dark matter.”
As a result, many researchers were confident that supersymmetry would
be experimentally validated soon after the Large Hadron Collider became
operational.
That’s
not how things worked out, however. To date, no supersymmetric
particles have been found. If the Large Hadron Collider cannot detect
these particles, many physicists will declare supersymmetry — and, by
extension, string theory — just another beautiful idea in physics that
didn’t pan out.
not how things worked out, however. To date, no supersymmetric
particles have been found. If the Large Hadron Collider cannot detect
these particles, many physicists will declare supersymmetry — and, by
extension, string theory — just another beautiful idea in physics that
didn’t pan out.
Recall the epicycles, the imaginary circles that Ptolemy used and
formalized around A.D. 150 to describe the motions of planets. Although
Ptolemy had no evidence for their existence, epicycles successfully
explained what the ancients could see in the night sky, so they were
accepted as real. But they were eventually shown to be a fiction, more
than 1,500 years later. Are superstrings and the multiverse,
painstakingly theorized by hundreds of brilliant scientists, anything
more than modern-day epicycles?
formalized around A.D. 150 to describe the motions of planets. Although
Ptolemy had no evidence for their existence, epicycles successfully
explained what the ancients could see in the night sky, so they were
accepted as real. But they were eventually shown to be a fiction, more
than 1,500 years later. Are superstrings and the multiverse,
painstakingly theorized by hundreds of brilliant scientists, anything
more than modern-day epicycles?
