The aftermath of the EPS Conference is quite exciting on a side. Higgs hunting points to an unexpected direction even if some residuals of an old expectation are still there. I just want to show you the graphs of this conference from Tevatron and LHC
From these it is very clear that the excluded range of mass is become significantly large restricting the possibilities to the intervals of a mass around 140 GeV or to a massive Higgs implying a strongly coupled theory. The evidence for a 140 GeV Higgs particle is yet small, about two sigmas, and we cannot exclude that this is a fluke but, to support this clue, it appears both at Tevatron and LHC. A small peak at around 250 GeV is seen only by ATLAS and could disappear in the future.
What I would like to emphasize here is that the possibility of a strongly coupled Higgs is well alive and this can have deep implications for the model and physics at large. There are several reasons for this. First of all, a strongly coupled Higgs field implies supersymmetry (see here). This result is inescapable and some breaking pattern of supersymmetry must be devised to get the right mass spectrum of the Standard Model. But this is already old and well-acquired matter. The most important point is that there will be a completely new way to approach quantum field theory. So far, quantum field theory has been managed just using weak perturbation theory but a strongly coupled Higgs would mean that we will also have to devise a perturbative technique the other way round, i.e. with a coupling increasingly large.
So, I will keep on support this view of a heavy Higgs as, being a theoretical physicist, consequences will be devastating and largely more exciting of any other possibility. We will be eager to see the improvement in the next months from the measurement datasets. Certainly, on 2012 all the curtains will be definitely down.
Marco Frasca (2010). Mass generation and supersymmetry arXiv arXiv: 1007.5275v2
The Gauge Connection 
What do we know about a flavor-color coupling? this was the assumption of the Wjj bump.
QCD has also some perturbations. Unfortunately badly known.
Does this mean we can largely forget about CKM and Feynman, because they handle the weak force? How about a graviton, it must also be weak? So,we are looking for some gluon-like new force?
Another badly known thing is couplings between dimesions, a dimension-scaling-hierarchy. If the GUT-scenario is wrong there must be something else.
Dear Mrs. Ullalla’,
I think that you missed this 😆 before your signature.
If you feel uncomfortable with what I write please remember that this is my zone where I am free to write everything I like and you are free to go elsewhere being the web large enough.
So, I invite you to turn to your blog and those of your beloved great scientist friends avoiding to annoy people around.
Marco
Thanks for your invitation.
Why would I miss the :D? I know myself this is not my field, so I make my comments to learn. You have many interesting papers on arXive. And you are free to do whatever you want. Your pleasure. Great interaction.
You write: in a strong coupling limit for the scalar field, all the fields of the model acquire the same mass and the coupling are fixed consistently with a supersymmetric model. We maintain for the present the analysis to classical solutions but this model is amenable to a quantum treatment. A recent analysis also shows that the coupling of the scalar field theory decreases at lower momenta making all the scenario consistent to be extended to the standard model.
That is the GUT? (But no MSSM?) You also write about phase transitions and dimensions.
…showing how massless scalar field theory with a quartic scalar field, in the limit of an infinitely large self-interaction of the scalar field, gets all the fields massive and the couplings consistent with a supersymmetric theory.
How would that large, almost infinite, interaction be done?
An annoying comment. I can’t understand what would be so annoying? Why would I not be pleased with what you write? My ‘beloved great scientist friends’? I guess you mean Matti and Phil where I use to comment. What is wrong with that?
I am a biologist, MSc, no physicist, and I have never claimed I know physics either. I want to learn. I want to explain Life 😉
I read this is a Top Astrophysics Blog. Are they such people that don’t need interactions, like some iniert mass or diamonds, good in themselves. I have noticed here are very few comments, but maybe it should be so?
What so greatly surprices me is the absense of discussion about TGD. Why is it not discussed? Due to your ignorance? And you stay there with no answer after all these years? Unbelievable! High-level arrogancy!
And, yes, I am Mrs. Why would it need to be highlighted for? You are not presenting yourself as Mr.Frasca either, are you? Most of you fellows are simply Mr. Anon.
Have a nice day!
Dear Ulla,
Sorry for the misunderstanding. Please, keep on reading and commenting on this blog.
Marco
[…] a view of a strongly coupled Higgs boson as I have already pointed out in several posts and the most recent one. This in turn will entail a proof of existence for supersymmetry (see […]