0
$\begingroup$

Concerning this recent news from CERN:

CERN data on ‘beauty quarks’ behaviour may rewrite physics as we know it (TRT World, 24 March 2021)

My son and I (now 13yo) have been doing home based weighing and measuring experiments since he moved up to middle school in 2019. The idea of doing 'Physics' and experiments had captured his imagination so we started with pendulums and moved onto 'raspberry pi' based electronic weighing circuits in order to gain values for 'small g'. We found the data we gathered (see here) displayed a strong what turned out to be a tidal 'signal'. I then read that CERN suffered from a similar problem at the LHC presumably due to Lake Geneva.

My question is this: We calculated from our results and additional theories that we were witnessing a 353.7 (average) year figure for the tidal cycle (as a sub cycle of an 18.6 year full cycle) and that the 365.2 day solar cycle had little if nothing to do with our results even during the perihelion event usually in January each year. Could the issues that they are encountering concerning the decay of Muons (which I know little to nothing about, having only completed a level 3 course in Quantum Mechanics with the OU here in the UK, quite a few years ago) at CERN be more to do with their choice of year figure?

$\endgroup$
0

1 Answer 1

0
$\begingroup$

Tides are due to the moon's pull, even on solid earth, since the crust is resting on a liquid core. They are called earth tides. This is long known at CERN and the beam lines have been corrected for decades in order to have the energy and positional accuracy they need, so, no, the measurements themselves are already corrected for the the tide.

This effect has been known since the LEP days, the Large Electron Positron collider, the LHC predecessor. The LHC reuses the same circular tunnel as LEP. Twenty some years ago, it then came as a surprise that, given the 27 km circumference of the accelerator, the gravitational force exerted by the moon on one side is not the same as the one felt at the opposite side, creating a small distortion of the tunnel. Since the moon’s effect is very small, only large bodies like oceans feel its effect in the form of tides. But the LHC is such a sensitive apparatus, it can detect the minute deformations created by the small differences in the gravitational force across its diameter. The effect is of course largest when the moon is full or during the new moon, when the sun and the moon combine their tidal forces for being all aligned with the earth. But the same happens twice a day like the tides and the operators must correct for it.

$\endgroup$
18
  • $\begingroup$ To clarify, in the same article about the tidal signal CERN detailed how they adjusted for the tidal signal. I was wondering if the year figure of 365.2 days was significant in their calculation. If so then maybe they are not using the correct figure. NB/The tidal signal is electromagnetic and comparitively easy to detect. $\endgroup$
    – John Davis
    Commented May 31, 2021 at 15:19
  • $\begingroup$ The LHC electronics are very well protected from external electromagnetic radiation, so could not show any variation due to days of the year. I do not understand your plot, and cannot comment. In general $\endgroup$
    – anna v
    Commented May 31, 2021 at 16:09
  • $\begingroup$ Anna thanks for getting back to us. I know that the Geophys guys suffer with the tidal signal no matter how much they try and shield it out and compensate for it in their gravimeters. If they are using 365.2 days as a periodic figure for their results then this might give a different result in terms of averages than a different figure. So; if time period critical does the standard model revolve around a 365.2 day year? $\endgroup$
    – John Davis
    Commented May 31, 2021 at 16:20
  • $\begingroup$ The data checked for the standard model of particle physics work with nanoseconds and nanometers. There is no larger time interval involved in this data or models. $\endgroup$
    – anna v
    Commented May 31, 2021 at 16:24
  • $\begingroup$ Ok but they are saying that there is a surfit of one type or the other where they would expect even numbers in the standard model. This suggests an average figure over a macro time period. I believe the time quoted was since they started their experiments using the data they had so far... $\endgroup$
    – John Davis
    Commented May 31, 2021 at 16:27

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

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