Fake Banner
Letter To A Demanding PhD Supervisor

A fundamental component of my research work is the close collaboration with a large number of scientists...

Letter To A Future AGI

I am writing this letter in the belief that the development of an artificial general intelligence...

A Great Year For Experiment Design

While 2025 will arguably not be remembered as a very positive year for humankind, for many reasons...

Living At The Polar Circle

Since 2022, when I got invited for a keynote talk at a Deep Learning school, I have been visiting...

User picture.
picture for Hank Campbellpicture for Patrick Lockerbypicture for Heidi Hendersonpicture for Bente Lilja Byepicture for Sascha Vongehrpicture for Johannes Koelman
Tommaso DorigoRSS Feed of this column.

Tommaso Dorigo is an experimental particle physicist, who works for the INFN at the University of Padova, and collaborates with the CMS and the SWGO experiments. He is the president of the Read More »

Blogroll
Ben Kilminster is a friend and a distinguished colleague working for the CMS and CDF experiments. Besides being a long-time higgs hunter, having sought that particle for over a decade in the two mentioned experiments, Ben is a veteran of science outreach since for many years he has published summaries of CDF results for the public on the online magazine "Fermilab Today". When I saw him posting on a social network an earlier version of the text below, which I liked a lot, I asked him to make it a guest post entry for my blog, and he graciously agreed.
The new PDG - a full-size copy of the glorious "Review of Particle Properties"- is on my desk since its arrival a few weeks ago, but only today did I get some time to browse it.

It is always awesome to observe how much information is contained in it. It is 1526 pages long, and I wonder how many typos and mistakes are contained in the data-thick pages... Probably much fewer than an ordinary book. Some of the review articles are of exceptionally good quality, because they have been passed from hand to hand in the last few dozen years, and constantly improved. If you want an example, for instance, go to the "Statistics" section - you will find a lot of new material which, along with the old one, still meets the highest standards.
I may have been unattentive to recent papers on Supersymmetry, but I got the impression that during the last few months the majority of SUSY phenomenologists have been keen on speculating on the few apparently non-standard features of the recently discovered Higgs boson, as published last June (such as the alleged copious decay of photon pairs, or the dearth of decays to tau lepton pairs or b-quark pairs - note: all are mostly back to what the standard model predicts, after the analysis of more data following the discovery announcements), but rather improductive on the front of taking the new signal as a pivot point for new global fits.
"Given that a repeated series of trials is required, frequentists are unable to assign probabilities to single events. Thus, with regard to whether it was raining in Manchester yesterday, there is no way of creating a large number of `yesterdays' in order to determine the probability. Frequentists would say that, even though they might not know, in actual fact it either was raining or it wasn't, and so this is not a matter for assigning a probability. And the same remains true even if we replace `Manchester' by `the Sahara Desert'.
I just read with interest and awe the nice article appeared today in the arxiv about the search for dark matter annihilation in the sun's core by the Baksan Underground Scintillator Telescope (BUST), a facility operating since December 1978 (!) in the Caucasian valley of Baksan.
I am glad to see that the Higgs signal we have discovered last July continues to raise the interest of well-learned laypersons around the world. The confirmation this time comes from the fact that three readers of this blog have decided to challenge my bet that the two signals found by ATLAS in the gamma-gamma and ZZ decay modes, which presently have a discrepant measured mass, are no hint of two distinct resonances, but rather a systematic effect.