Skip to main content
8 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Apr 13, 2017 at 12:39 history edited CommunityBot
replaced http://physics.stackexchange.com/ with https://physics.stackexchange.com/
Jun 12, 2015 at 14:23 vote accept CommunityBot moved from User.Id=81619 by developer User.Id=2911
Jun 10, 2015 at 17:45 answer added TimeVariant timeline score: 1
Jun 6, 2015 at 22:01 comment added CuriousOne The one way we can change the coupling is by changing the particle type for the collision (aka "new accelerator"). Once that's fixed and the beams are colliding head on (I have not seen a large angle collider design, but it might be an interesting question if that would make sense), then the remaining choice is polarizations. I don't know if that changes branching ratios or only the angular distribution of the detected decay particles. The ratios are basically the relative probabilities for decay channels and they are, if I get this right, much better known than the absolute probabilities.
Jun 6, 2015 at 21:52 comment added user81619 But if the coupling constants were dominant, would that not reduce probability and the process would be more deterministic? Again, questions before reading up more is not a good idea. I would need to read up more on it, no doubt about that. What's a branching ratio, guessing it's the proportion you get out of each possible channel?
Jun 6, 2015 at 21:46 comment added CuriousOne The branching ratios are given by the couplings, so there is nothing to tune. The total "production cross section", which is the most important parameter for an experiment, that changes with beam energy and it can be resonant, but for the Higgs in the LHC it's not: image.slidesharecdn.com/elwmskcc20120420-140207110356-phpapp01/…. If we could control all the kinematic parameters in a collision, the Higgs should be easy to detect, I believe, but then we can't!
Jun 6, 2015 at 21:46 history edited user81619 CC BY-SA 3.0
added 13 characters in body
Jun 6, 2015 at 21:30 history asked user81619 CC BY-SA 3.0