Muon's magnetic moment exposes a hole in the Standard Model, unless it doesn't
12 comments
·February 27, 2025moelf
addaon
> it means the Theory Initiative will have a target that will never move to aim for when working out their final SM prediction
Sure, and this breaks some level of independence between this two workstreams -- it seems unlikely that the Theory Initiative will publish a number that diverges further from the experimental side.
But on the other hand, we're going to be in a world where there are two theoretical estimates, one based partially on empirical methods and one based on lattice methods, and these are going to diverge. So the obvious next task for the theory group is to (a) explain why these diverge and (b) explain why the lattice method is the more accurate one. Which likely will lead to more work for the experimentalists to explain why the inputs to the empirical methods didn't generalize.
Plenty to still learn here.
panda-giddiness
Essentially all of the theory research (specifically, lattice QCD calculations) since the previous white paper in 2020 have been conducted blinded, and at any rate, the deadline to be included in the theory average has already passed. It would take an act of extraordinary brashness to fudge the numbers now.
NoMoreNicksLeft
Weren't you guys supposed to save these stories for Muonday Mondays? Weekend's too long of a wait?
ge96
I miss Topological Tuesdays or Turing Thursdays
dang
[stub for offtopicness]
jmward01
Completely not about the article, but the site's cookie page is a dark pattern nightmare. Which way is 'off' for those sliders? Why is 'save and exit' small as if it is the 'cancel' and 'ACCEPT ALL' big and red like it is the 'ok, save the setting you just selected'. My trust in this site and the content on it is 0.
ge96
I wonder why I didn't get it, on Chrome with UBO
librasteve
[flagged]
addaon
It's worth continuing. It's a well-put-together summary article. Yeah, the cupcake analogy is contrived -- but it's as good an analogy as any other to make it clear that the topic of the article is the difference between a theoretical and experimental measurement.
wholinator2
Couldn't read being the undismissable cookie banner that took up 90% of the screen. One big button that said "accept all and close". I'd rather just close, thank you
null
>The task before the Muon g-2 Theory Initiative is to solve these dilemmas and update the 2020 data-driven SM prediction. Two new publications are planned. The first will be released in 2025 (to coincide with the new experimental result from Fermilab). This will describe the current status and ongoing body of work, but a full, updated SM prediction will have to wait for the second paper, likely to be published several years later.
a bit unsatisfying, basically the Muon g-2 Theory Initiative which gave us the 2020 prediction that turned out to be wildly different from FNAL measurement is going to publish an updated version of the prediction after FNAL releases their final result.
it means the Theory Initiative will have a target that will never move to aim for when working out their final SM prediction