In short particles with more mass lead to beams with more energy.  More massive particles reach these energies with much smaller machines. Interesting and fundamental physics would be possible with a muon collider, of 6.3 km circumference and neutrino factory which would be far less expensive than a 50 km linear electron accelerator. As we learned from the Superconducting Supercollider less expensive is good, more expensive is less likely to be built

My readers may wonder what I have been doing.   The answer is I have been working on my thesis is the area of astrophysics.  With much help from my advisor Dr. Anuj P. Sarma I am finally finishing. 

Probably no signs of gravitational waves, signs of dark matter but not a discovery. That is the word from this first day of the American Physical Society's meeting in Denver Colorado. 

 In the plenary keynote session of the meeting today, I asked a question of Lloyd Knox of the PLANCK collaboration. My question regarded the B mode polarization data and what it may show. He said that this data would be officially released next year. He also expressed the professional opinion that the data may not show a strong gravitational wave signal. This would be significant since the simplest models of inflation predict a strong gravitational wave signal. Dr. Knox went as far as to state “the simplest models are probably ruled out” (not quite verbatim.)

The Alpha Magnetic Spectrometer has found is that there are interesting features in the cosmic ray background which could indicate dark matter particle anti particle annihilations.  That is not the same as finding dark matter.   The ANTARES neutrino telescope was used to take observations of the solar neutrino flux with directionality, which found no excess of neutrinos from the sun  (http://arxiv.org/abs/1302.6516).  That would have indicated dark matter concentrated at the center of mass of our solar system.   Taken together these results indicate that many of our assumptions on the nature of dark matter are wrong.

A ground breaking paper has been published in the journal of comparative irrelevance which shows the Lambda CDM model is wrong.  It's all in the numbers..
This theory explains everything better than LCDM.

http://arxiv.org/abs/1303.7476

From the perspective of one theoretical particle physicist Planck found far from "nothing". The ESA's Planck probe largely corroborates the findings of NASA's WMAP probe, but it leaves theoretical astrophysics unsettled. After reading my fellow blogger Dr. Tommaso Dorigo's coverage of the Planck announcement I was unsure how to react. We can only conclude that the Planck mission has largely confirmed WMAP's results. Just this kind of confirmation is a basic step in the scientific method.