News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Dreams of new physics fade with latest muon magnetism result by bkovacic on Friday August 11, 2023 @09:38AM (#37088564)
One of the patents original authors filed said it required current to go through material in order to exhibit superconductor properties. That still leaves hope as these tests are performed without current flowing through material.
Re:Dreams of new physics fade with latest muon magnetism result by tux3 on Friday August 11, 2023 @09:41AM (#37088588)
The muon g-2 measurements have nothing to do with floating rocks. This is not a superconductor update.

This is a high energy physics thing about failing to find something beyond the standard model. Just your regularly scheduled "5 sigma physics anomalies that disappear on their own with better measurements" programming.

Re:Dreams of new physics fade with latest muon magnetism result by pfdietz on Friday August 11, 2023 @09:48AM (#37088646)
It wasn't the measurements that were the problem, it was the calculation of what the standard model predicts.
Re:Dreams of new physics fade with latest muon magnetism result by tux3 on Friday August 11, 2023 @10:03AM (#37088782)
Right. I mean that measurements conflicted with theory, and the new CMD-3 measurements suggest a better calculation. Assuming CMD-3 is good, there's no significant gap between theory results and collider results
Re:Dreams of new physics fade with latest muon magnetism result by pfdietz on Friday August 11, 2023 @10:10AM (#37088861)
That wasn't the only change. There was an alternate computational scheme that didn't depend on electron-positron experiments that gave results consistent with the Muon g-2 experiment.
Re:Dreams of new physics fade with latest muon magnetism result by tux3 on Friday August 11, 2023 @10:36AM (#37089165)
Fair enough, I suppose! Thanks for the the correction.
Re:Dreams of new physics fade with latest muon magnetism result by whycome on Friday August 11, 2023 @09:47AM (#37088643)