Today, at HCP2012, new results on Higgs boson search were made available by CMS and ATLAS. Of course, well aligned with preceding rumors, all in all these appear rather disappointing. Maybe, beyond the increasing agreement with Standard Model expectations, the most delusional result is that the particle announced on July 4th appears to be completely lonely on a desert ranging till almost 1 TeV, at least if one is looking for other Higgs particles behaving Standard Model-like. 
In a retrospective we could say that people claiming for a prize to discoverers of the Higgs mechanism seem to be vindicated. There appears no sign of supersymmetry that is more and more relinquished in a nowhere land. But, I would like to point out that, if a supersymmetric theory is the right one, there is just one theory to be singled out exploring the parameter space. It is normal in any case to see such a vast epidemic death of theories. It is also possible that theorists should now do a significant effort for new proposals beyond those largely explored in these last thirty years.
Standard Model is even more resembling a perfect theory really unbreakable and mimicking the success of the Maxwell equations put forward 150 years ago. But we know it must break…
Finally, I would like to conclude this rather fizzling out post by pointing out a rather funny side of this situation. Tommaso Dorigo has a bet on with Gordon Watts and Jacques Distler amounting to $1200 on the non-existence of SUSY partners. This bet has not been payed yet as Distler is claiming there are a lot of “juicy rumors” from CERN and the terms are not fulfilled yet (see comments here). I do not know what rumors Distler is talking about but, unless CERN is not hiding data (that would appear a rather strange behavior at best), maybe it is time to do a check on who the winner could be.
The Gauge Connection 
Does your Unbreakable title refer to the SM theory “rightness” or to the absence of any “breakdown” in the SUSY sector many people is defending yet, in spite of its evident fault?
Hi amarashiki,
I am referring to the “rightness” of the Standard Model, somewhat unexpected let me say.
Marco
Well, we have some anomalies yet to be explained, but I suppose this week’s results are a serious smash to many BSM theories, in spite that some of them, with a parameter space too large, can not be totally rejected.
If SUSY is wrong…What stabilizes the Higgs potential and the Higgs mass? What kind of symmetry can protect Higgs to be light if it is not SUSY? SUSY can NOT explain why the Higgs mass is so tiny if some lighter sparticles don’t appear…I am a full expert in SUSY, since I only studied it in my master degree but I have studied by my own and if SUSY is moved beyond the LHC scope…It must be wrong or at least SUSY is not what we think SUSY is because a little hierarchy between the electroweak scale and the SUSY breaking scale, in my opinion, leaves little space to explain a light Higgs or why the observerd cosmological constant is wrong…Unless, there are some non-perturbative stuff that is hidden from current data… One of my experimental friends told me yesterday: “SUSY has what it deserves” …LOL…
SUSY has a lot of foes these days. From a theoretical standpoint I like it and I hope it will prove right someday. I am also on this bandwagon (http://arxiv.org/abs/1211.1039 and http://arxiv.org/abs/1007.5275) but I have nothing to lose if LHC should give evidence against it.
My view is that hierarchy problem is a false problem that arises because you keep the mass term for the scalar field. Mass arises also without it just from the field nonlinearities. But LHC seems to have swept all this away and possibly nature has chosen the standard Higgs potential.
Marco
I know those papers. I have read them all. I wish I could undertand them better, but I will… I have also read the Shaposnikov’s papers about asymptotically safety gravity+unimodular gravity+NSM and the end of the story till Planck scale. That Schaposhnikov scenario, a version of the Desert nightmare or the ultimate nightmare of theoretical physists in the branch of collider physics…It has also some problems, and I don’t understand them yet well enough to judge.
The question of why Nature chooses the simplest potential is not clear…I am aware about the notion of mass as non-linearities…Something quite cool and remarkable, it you allow me to say.
With respect to SUSY, I agree partly with you. As a teenager, I was reading stuff about strings and superstrings and SUSY, Dark Matter, etc…So, it drove me to become a physicist in part. However, I felt dissappointed when I discovered SUSY or even strings in their current formulations do not answer the big Feynmann like questions… Why the electron has the mass it owns? And the issue of mass, specially those concerning hadrons, is an issue related to QCD and the non-linearities as you said…Anyway, even in the worst scenario, like it happened with the no-aether more than one century ago…Something new has to emerge to explain this stuff…Do we agree? There must be a reason of why the Universe is being described effectively at “low energies” by the current SM and GR as we know them till now…
Big hints must be:
1st. Dark Matter. I have my own suspitions about what DM is…If I am right it is not SUSY…
2nd. Dark Energy. It is the big puzzle in cosmology, the Einstein’s biggest blunder now it is the biggest “prediction” from an observational cosmological viewpoint.
3rd. Anomalous magnetic moment in the muon. Yet unexplained, as far as I know.
4th. Neutrinos. Spectrum? Dirac/Majorana/PseudoDirac? Sterile neutrinos out there?
5th. The values of “fundamental constants” and masses of particles.
6th. What is Quantum Gravity? What are the microscopic states of the space-time creating the BH entropy?
…
To say only the most interesting for me at current time…
And then there is other possibility for SUSY: if you, Marco, get at the end to enable some Higgs mechanism connected to QCD, surely the sBootstrap mechanism that I described in a post at Dorigo’s blog, http://dorigo.wordpress.com/2007/10/16/guest-post-alejandro-rivero-sbootstrap/ , should leave the whole bet undecided: susy discovered, but with the particles we know already.
Dear Alejandro,
I am somewhat pessimist and I hope to be proven wrong. As far as I can tell, unless either superpartners are seen or other Higgs-like particles are buried into the CERN data (but why should they hide data?), I cannot see not even a shadow of SUSY at horizon.
Marco