3
$\begingroup$

This question already has an answer here:

The LHC can reach energies from $7(TeV)$ to $13(TeV)$ (see here) and the question of which this is supposed a duplicate. Which I think it isn't, because in that question (which has been asked already eight years ago) there is nothing asked (which obviously just couldn't) about the current situation. In an answer to it, it is said that until 2020 (which is just a guess) the lower bound of SUSY particles will be reached. Now the lightest sparticle is the neutralino with a supposed mass of about $300(GeV).$, which is 40(!) times as high as the energy the LHC can supposedly reach and I think (correct me if I'm wrong) that there are sparticles which have a mass lower than this. I couldn't find the mass though of the next lightest sparticle (after the neutralino) predicted by any theory that incorporates SUSY. For sure, the neutralino hasn't been found though. Maybe that's because it's difficult to find them, Which I don't know. Wouldn't (in the light of this) the next sparticle (with respect to mass) have been found yet?

So isn't this proof that the search for supersymmetric particles is a search in the dark for nothing and supersymmetry is non-existing?

$\endgroup$

marked as duplicate by Qmechanic Jun 13 at 6:54

This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.

  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Generally,absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, not being limited to physics. $\endgroup$ – Poutnik Jun 13 at 6:46
  • $\begingroup$ Possible duplicates: physics.stackexchange.com/q/6438/2451 , physics.stackexchange.com/q/54733/2451 and links therein. $\endgroup$ – Qmechanic Jun 13 at 6:54
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ This is definitely not a duplicate of the question marked as duplicate! Can we please learn how to vote for re-opening in such cases? This is an important question, a hot issue in particle physics, the currently offered answer doesn't cover it - and since it is closed we cannot give other, proper, answers. $\endgroup$ – Helen Jul 28 at 19:41
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Qmechanic why do you say that these are the same question? Imho the only common thing among them is the word "Susy". $\endgroup$ – Helen Jul 28 at 19:42
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I totally agree with you, @Helen! $\endgroup$ – descheleschilder Jul 29 at 9:28
1
$\begingroup$

No, it is not proof. There are supersymmetric models in which supersymmetry would not be detectable at LHC energies. For an example, see this paper.

Do not confuse the general idea of supersymmetry with a particular supersymmetric model such as MSSM, the Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model, which does now seem to be untenable.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Why is the MSSM ruled out? And what is the mass of the lightest sparticle (after the neutralino) predicted by a generic physical theory in which supersymmetry is used? I couldn't find this on the net. $\endgroup$ – descheleschilder Jun 13 at 10:59

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.