They did it then! Mini Big Bang in a test tube...

[delsix]

There is no Higgs.

and you know this how?

[Macavity]

Thanks for the summary plot ref., George. I have to admit a lack of familiarity with the (now customary?) "Cheese and Lettuce" or "Brazilian" (soccer!) graphs. <G> But I think it fair to say one might "slightly worry when the solid line dips below 1.0". Or rather the possibilities become more constrained...

As you suggest, higher energies and increased total integrated luminosity are (always) needed. The experimental challenges are still formidable and the predictions model dependent etc.

For a longer read (re. methodology, terminology etc.):

Learn To Compute Higgs Limits On The Fly

Not too bad - Even for mere mortals.

[themos]

and you know this how?

I don't "know" it as well as I know other things, I grant you. Hawking has bet money that there is no Higgs and I think his hunch is correct. There will be no fundamental scalar particle.

[George Jones]

If I had to wager money, I would bet that The LHC will find at least one Higgs particle, but I hope that completely new physics is found instead. There is hope (and some theorrtical evidence) that the LHC running at full power will give experimental results that can distinguish between:

1) a single Higgs particle, as predicted by the Minimal Standard Model;

2) several different Higgs particles, as predicted by supersymmetry;

3) a Higgs particle composed of more elementary particles (similar to protons being composed of quarks), as predicted by tecnhicolour;

4) some other mechanism (completely new physics) for the electroweak sector.

I would bet on 1), but I hope for 4). This possibility certainly cannot be ruled out, and it would be incredibly exciting! I think that many particle physicists would bet on 2).

[blacksaltire]

the otters stole it !

[Manok101]

Heelp! I'm being sucked in! No wait, that's just my cat licking my face.