I did not think I would need to explain here things that should be obvious to any sentient being, but the recent activity I detect on Facebook and other sites, and the misinformation spread by some science popularization sources and bloggers around the conclusions reached last week by the European Strategy Update for Particle Physics (EUSUPP), a 2-year-long process that saw the participation of hundreds of scientists and the heavy involvement of some of our leading thinkers, forced me to change my mind.

Fundamental science works by alternating phases of interpretation and refutation. When interpreting the result of experiments, physicists spend their time sweating shirt after shirt in the attempt of formulating economical and coherent explanations of observed phenomena. If the process converges, they formulate a theory which works well, whereby they celebrate for a little while. Then a second phase starts, when hypotheses are formulated on how to refute the shiny new model, finding effects and observatons that do not fit in the formulated framework. And so on.

The text below is the sixth and last part of what could have become "Chapter 13" of the book "Anomaly! Collider Physics and the Quest for New Phenomena at Fermilab", which I published in 2016.

The text below is the fifth part of what could have become "Chapter 13" of the book "Anomaly! Collider Physics and the Quest for New Phenomena at Fermilab", which I published in 2016. For part 1 see here; for part 2 see here; for part 3 see here; for part 4 see here.

No superjets in Run 2

The text below is the fourth part of what could have become "Chapter 13" of the book "Anomaly! Collider Physics and the Quest for New Phenomena at Fermilab", which I published in 2016. For part 1 see here; for part 2 see here; for part 3 see here.