Physics

Shoot. Today I am on strike.

This morning I decided to post here an article describing the details of a new result just approved by the CMS collaboration, the observation of a nice signal of phi meson decays. It is a result of which I am quite proud, and although not really a big deal, it is a nice way to start the new year, while we wait for more data from the LHC.

I had just finished writing the 200-lines piece describing the likelihood fit to the mass distribution, when I decided to save the draft with the "publish" box unmarked, to give it a last reading before submitting it. And the crazy web interface logged me off the site instead!
Three weeks of speculations have come to an end. Since this morning Verlinde's paper is available on arXiv.
Today's visit to the Cornell Arxiv, the repository where scientific papers on physics, astrophysics, mathematics, and a few other disciplines are made publically accessible before getting published on paper, was a productive one. Some casual browsing allowed me to learn a few random things on topics I know little or nothing about; but what really made my day was reading study by a few distinguished theorists (Vernon Barger, Wai-Yee Keung, and Brian Yencho), who considered a collider signature I had been fantasizing about in the past.
"Blondes make the best victims. They're like virgin snow that shows up the bloody footprints."

Alfred Hitchcock
After re-emerging from a rather debilitating new years' eve banquet, I feel I can provide my own answers to the second batch of physics questions I proposed a few days ago to the most active readers of this column.

Be sure about one thing: the answers to the three questions have already been given in some form by a few of the readers in the comments thread; I will nonetheless provide my own explanations, and in so doing I might pick a graph or two to illustrate better the essence of the problems. But first, there was a bonus question included in the package, and nobody found the solution to it. Here is the bonus question again:

"What do you get if you put together three sexy red quarks ?"

The answer is
Rather than writing down my new year's resolution, I find it more constructive to look back at the past year and draw some conclusions on it. I have already done some analysis concerning this blog in a recent post; this one is a more personal view of what happened to me in 2009, and you might well consider it not interesting at all for you -but it is my blog, and it belongs here.

So, let me start with my family. In 2009 neither I, nor my wife or my children, had any major health problem. That is for sure an important thing of which I consider myself quite lucky. Heck, I did not even have to run to the emergency room once! (If you have small kids you know this does happen).
No, not a modification of the now classic "Say of the week" series. Rather, a quote from a very famous Physical Review article which is of relevance to a couple of questions I offered here and here this week:
Room for one please!”
Okay, the year is not over just yet, but it is already time for a little accounting of the traffic on this site in the course of the last eight-and-a-half months -that is, since I moved my blog to Scientific Blogging.

For this year's summary I have been inspired in part by Alex Antunes, who decided to pick his least read articles to draw some conclusions about what really does not sell well here. But I have of course also given a close look at what appears to appease your taste, dear readers.
The turnaround of the three physics questions I offered a few days ago, to stimulate your neurons and extract you from the chocolate and alcohol flood caused by the usual string of Christmas parties and dinners, was rather scarce. Despite that, I wish to repeat the offer today, making some adjustments to reach a wider public. The questions I offer here are easier but still not accessible to everybody. However, my plans are that at least the answers I will give in a couple of days will be understandable. Further, anyone can try the bonus question I ask at the bottom of this piece...