THE DIASTERS FROM THE BOOK OF REVELATION AND CERNS IMMEDIATELY DANGER (ONLY MY GUESS)

JEWISH KING JESUS IS COMING AT THE RAPTURE FOR US IN THE CLOUDS-DON'T MISS IT FOR THE WORLD.THE BIBLE TAKEN LITERALLY- WHEN THE PLAIN SENSE MAKES GOOD SENSE-SEEK NO OTHER SENSE-LEST YOU END UP IN NONSENSE.GET SAVED NOW- CALL ON JESUS TODAY.THE ONLY SAVIOR OF THE WHOLE EARTH - NO OTHER. 1 COR 15:23-JESUS THE FIRST FRUITS-CHRISTIANS RAPTURED TO JESUS-FIRST FRUITS OF THE SPIRIT-23 But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ’s at his coming.ROMANS 8:23 And not only they, but ourselves also, which have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body.(THE PRE-TRIB RAPTURE)

THE DIASTERS FROM THE BOOK OF REVELATION AND CERNS IMMEDIATELY DANGER (ONLY MY GUESS)

FEARFUL SIGHTS AND GREAT SIGNS FROM HEAVEN

LUKE 21:11,25-26
11 And great earthquakes shall be in divers places, and famines, and pestilences; and fearful sights and great signs shall there be from heaven.so was not yet deemed a threat to land.The storm was located about 580 miles (930 kilometers) west-southwest of the southernmost tip of the Cabo Verde Islands and had maximum sustained winds of 50 mph (85 kph), the center said.The storms churned in the Atlantic as rescuers in the U.S. Southeast searched for people unaccounted for after Hurricane Helene struck last week, leaving behind a trail of death and catastrophic damage.
25 And there shall be signs in the sun,(HEATING UP-SOLAR ECLIPSES) and in the moon,(MAN ON MOON-LUNAR ECLIPSES) and in the stars;(ASTEROIDS ETC) and upon the earth distress of nations, with perplexity;(MASS CONFUSION) the sea and the waves roaring;(FIERCE WINDS)
26 Men’s hearts failing them for fear,(TORNADOES,HURRICANES,STORMS) and for looking after those things which are coming on the earth:(DESTRUCTION) for the powers of heaven shall be shaken.(FROM QUAKES,NUKES ETC)

Ephesians 2:2
2 Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air,(LIBERAL GODLESS AIR WAVES) the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience:(GODLESS)

LAST NIGHT ON BEGLEY. BEGLEY SAID AT 10PM MIKE PHONED AND SAID GET READY FOR EVERYTHING IN THE BOOK OF REVELATION TO GO ON.THEN BEGLEY SAID MIKE IS GOING TO BE GONE FOR 3 DAYS.WELL I DECIDED TO LISTEN TO MIKES LAST MESSAGE ON APR 16,25 ON HIS SITE. SO I LISTENED. AND AT THE BEGGING HE SAID HE WAS WAITING FOR A PHONE CALL. THAT HE MIGHT HAVE TO LEAVE QUICK. BY 10PM HE WOULD KNOW. AFTER HIS RESURRECTION FRI MESSAGE. HE TALKED ABOUT CERN. SO I BELIEVE THAT THIS REVELATION DISASTER COMING WILL BE FROM CERN. SOMETHING TO DO ABOUT CERN. AS MIKE WAS CALLED TO THE 3 DAY CALLING. PROBABLY TO GENEVA SWITZERLAND AND CERN.

NOW WHAT MIKE SAID ABOUT CERN-THERES MANY CERN PLACES AROUND THE WORLD. AND ANY THING DISCOVERED IN ONE CERN PLACE. CAN BE DISTRIBUTED TO ALL THE CERN PLACES ON EARTH. ITS SOUNDS LIKE MIKE IS SAYING THIS CERN IS A GATEWAY TO EARTH DESTRUCTION. THE MORE PEOPLE FINALLY FIND OUT. THE MORE THERE GOING TO RUN BACK TO THE BIBLE FOR THE RESULTS OF WHATS HAPPENING. AS OF APR 14,25. THE WORLD IS DEALING WITH SOMETTHING IT HAS NEVER DEALT WITH BEFORE.ITS GONNA CAUSE THE UNSEEN TO BE SEEN. LIKE THE THE SCROUNGY LITTLE DUST MITE. IF YOU COULD SEE A DUST.YOU WOULD NOT LIKE IT. ITS ONE THING TO TALK ABOUT SEEING A DEMON. ITS ANOTHER THING WHEN THE DEMONS ARE MANIFESTING RIGHT BESIDE YOU. THIS WILL MAKE PEOPLE COMPREMENT WHAT THE SPIRITUAL RELM REALLY IS. ITS MORE LIKE OUR REALITY WILL BECOME REALITY. THE WORLD TOOK JESUS" NAME OUT OF EVERY THING ON EARTH. AND JESUS GOD GAVE THE WORLD OVER TO PROMISCIOUS SEX TO DEFILE THEIR BODIES AMOUNG EACH OTHER. THAT WAS THE 60S FREE LOVE HYPPIE MOVEMENT. THEN WE COME THE 1980S MOVEMENT. WHEN THE WORLD TOOK GOD OUT OF MORE AND MORE PLACES. AND HERE THEN IS THE 2ND GOD GAVE THEM OVER TO. HOMOSEXUALITY. MEN LUSTING AFTER MEN AND WOMEN LUSTING WOMEN. OR THE WAY GOD PUT 26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:(LESBIENS).27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet (AIDS).NOW WERE UP TO 2000S. AND THE 3RD GAVE THE WORLD VER TO. GOD GAVE THEM OVER TO A REPROBATE MIND (ANY SIN GOES). ROMANS 1:28-32
28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;
29 Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers,
30 Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,
31 Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful:
32 Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.
THE CERN FLOOD GATES ARE ABOUT TO OPEN. THE WORLD WANTS THE POWER TO MANIPULATE. TIME. THEY WANT TO MANIPULATE TIME. SO BIBLE PROPHECIES CAN NOT BE FULFILLED BY GOD.SO THEY THINK.(BUT THEIR A BUNCH OF LOSER LIER LIBERALS). GODS PROPHECIES WILL BE FULFILLED LITERALLY. NO MATTER HOW THESE DUMB LIBERAL IDIOTS AT CERN WANT TO CHANGE THE TIMES AND SEASONS. QUANTUM COMPUTING IS GIVING THE ANSWER THE ANSWER BEFORE YOU EVEN ASK THE QUESTION. WHICH MEANS THE QUANTUM COMPUTER NOS EXACTLY WHAT YOUR THINKING. BEFORE YOU EVEN RIGHT THE QUESTION TO THE COMPUTER. IT CALLED. THE QUANTUM COMPUTER HAS LIFE IN IT. IT GOT ITS OWN MEMORY. AND KNOW EVERYTHING YOUR THINKING ABOUT. ITS CALLED BRAIN-WASHING, MIND CONTROL.WELL CERN HAS DISCOVERED THIS MIND MANIPULATION. JUST LIKE A QUANTUM COMPUTER. WELL I WONDER WHY MIKE WOULD TELL BEGLEY THAT THIS COULD BE DEALING WITH ALL THE BOOK OF REVELATIONS JUDEMENTS.WHEN MIKE IS TALKING ABOUT DEMONS AND CERN.

Researchers figured out how many bits per second of data the human brain can process-January 5, 2025

Scientists at the California Institute of Technology have uncovered a surprising truth about the speed of human thought: our brains process ideas at a rate of just 10 bits per second. Compared to the billion bits per second our sensory systems gather from the world around us, this is astonishingly slow.Led by Markus Meister and graduate student Jieyu Zheng, researchers used information theory to analyze behaviors such as reading, writing, and solving puzzles. Despite having over 85 billion neurons, the brain’s overall thought process seems to remain constrained by its architecture.The findings, published in the journal Neuron, revealed that the speed of human thought is far slower than technologies like Wi-Fi, which processes around 50 million bits per second. This disparity raises important questions about how the brain filters vast amounts of sensory input to focus on what truly matters.Of course, a significant portion of these neurons is dedicated to the cortex, which is responsible for high-level thinking. While individual neurons can transmit more than 10 bits per second, interestingly, our collective thought process functions at a glacial pace.This highlights a peculiar aspect of human cognition: we can process only one thought at a time, unlike our sensory systems, which operate in parallel. The researchers suggest that this limited speed of human thought may have evolutionary roots.Early creatures with nervous systems used their brains primarily for navigation—finding food and avoiding predators. Over time, as brains evolved, this “one-path-at-a-time” mechanism likely carried over into more complex cognitive functions. The researchers say to think of human thought as navigating a space of abstract concepts, much like plotting a path on a mental map.This discovery also has implications for futuristic technologies, such as brain-computer interfaces. While these devices promise faster communication, the inherent slowness of our cognitive processes may act as a bottleneck. Unfortunately, only time will tell.However, there’s a silver lining here. Our ancestors thrived in environments where slow and deliberate thinking ensured survival. Perhaps the same can be said for us in a world where we aren’t always fighting for our lives against predators that want to kill us.The post Researchers figured out how many bits per second of data the human brain can process appeared first on BGR.

Quantum Computing Explained-Three qubits appear in an artist’s conception as X-shaped icons that fit together.

A computer that could break the encryption that safeguards your private information on the internet. A machine that can design powerful new drugs by precisely simulating the behavior of individual molecules. A device that optimizes complex supply chains to help companies get the parts they need and assemble them in the most efficient way possible.These are all examples of how an emerging technology — the quantum computer — could change our world.These computers work by harnessing quantum physics — the strange, often counterintuitive laws that govern the universe at its smallest scales and coldest temperatures. Today’s quantum computers are rudimentary and error-prone. But if more advanced and robust versions can be made, they have the potential to rapidly crunch through certain problems that would take current computers years. That’s why governments, companies and research labs around the world are working feverishly toward this goal.Quantum computers will not replace our familiar “classical” computers. Rather, the two types of machines could work together to solve problems that stymie classical computers, potentially supercharging scientific research in fields such as materials and drug discovery, giving a boost to industry and upending cybersecurity as we know it.Let’s explore how quantum computers work.What is quantum, anyway? Quantum physics describes the universe at its smallest and most fundamental scales — think atoms and molecules; light and energy. Things at these scales behave very differently from everyday objects we’re familiar with.One of the most important differences involves a concept called superposition. Let’s start by considering an everyday, human-scale object such as a person on a ladder. Depending on which rung the person stands on, they have a certain amount of potential energy. (This potential energy determines how fast the person would be moving when they hit the ground if they were to jump off the ladder.) A person on the ground has the smallest possible amount of energy in this system. Someone on the first rung has slightly more energy, and so on up to the highest rung.By contrast, tiny objects such as atoms can act as though they have two or more distinct amounts of energy at once. In our ladder example, this would be akin to simultaneously standing on the ladder’s lowest and highest rungs — something that makes no sense for a person.Once placed into this kind of mixed energy state, known as a “quantum superposition,” an atom will remain there until it is measured or disturbed by the outside world. Then the atom “collapses” to a single energy state — following our analogy, to either the low or high rung of the ladder.Superposition: A circle is split, with halves marked 0 and 1. When a ruler appears, the entire circle becomes 1.A particle starts out in a quantum superposition of energy state 0 and energy state 1. When the particle is measured (represented by a ruler), it must instantaneously and randomly “collapse” to be either fully in state 0 or state 1.To cast this idea into familiar terms, the famous physicist Erwin Schrödinger came up with a memorable, though absurd, thought experiment: Imagine a perfectly sealed box containing a cat and a poison trap that can be triggered by the decay of a radioactive atom. Because the decay of the atom is uncertain, at any given time, the cat is in a superposition of dead and alive. Only when someone opens the box and measures the cat does its state “collapse” to being either definitively alive or definitively dead. Real cats can’t be both alive and dead, of course, but Schrödinger’s imaginary cat has become an enduring metaphor to help people grapple with the strangeness of superposition.Building on the superposition concept, multiple atoms or other quantum objects can be entangled with each other to share a single quantum state. Now imagine several cats in Schrödinger’s box, potential victims of the same trap. These cats are “entangled” in a superposition of all being alive or all being dead. When someone opens the box, not just the state of one cat but those of all the cats immediately collapse, and each cat is found to be fully alive or fully dead. “Entanglement means you’ve got at least two things that are always connected; they have no independent existence,” explains NIST physicist Andrew Wilson.Entanglement: Two circles connected with a wavy line are each split, with halves marked 0 and 1. When a ruler appears, one circle becomes entirely 0 and the other is entirely 1.A pair of particles start out each in a quantum superposition of energy state 0 and energy state 1. Because the particles are also entangled with each other, when one is measured (represented by a ruler), both must randomly “collapse” such that one is fully in state 0 and the other is fully in state 1. The collapse is instantaneous for both particles, no matter how far apart they are.These scenarios strike us as absurd when applied to familiar objects such as cats. But at the atomic level, this is how the world works. Tiny objects such as atoms can exist in multiple states simultaneously. And these states can be entangled with those of other objects even when the objects are far apart. “Let’s say you have an entangled pair of particles and you put one on the Moon and the other on the surface of the Earth. If you then do something to the one on the Earth, you simultaneously affect the other,” Wilson says. “It’s kind of romantic!”We’ll soon explore how physicists use these ideas to build quantum computers. But first we need to understand ...What is a computer? These days, we use computers for just about everything: gaming and streaming, banking and shopping, following our favorite sports teams and chatting with friends and family members. But we rarely think about what a computer is or how it works.At its most fundamental level, a computer is any device that takes in data, processes it, stores it and spits it out. The phones in our pockets, the servers in data centers, the microprocessors in our cars and the room-sized supercomputers at national labs: All of these digital computers encode and process information using “bits.” Bits are “binary digits” that encode information — text, graphics and so on — as 1s and 0s. For example, computers typically represent the letter “A” using the bit string “01000001.”But bits, like the computers they are part of, are not just mathematical concepts. They need to be realized in physical objects such as tiny bar magnets or electric switches that can be placed into one of two distinct states, say pointed up or pointed down.Bits are very good at what they do. Put a bit into a “0” or “1” state and it will usually stay there for a long time, meaning the information it encodes is stable and long-lasting. But bits are also limited.Quantum computers also have input, output, information processing and memory. But instead of regular classical bits, quantum computers use quantum bits, or qubits. Like Schrödinger’s unfortunate cat, qubits can be put into superpositions of multiple states. In other words, a qubit can be in state 0, state 1, or a mix of the two. And the quantum states of individual qubits can be entangled with each other.These capabilities give quantum computers their superpower. Whereas two classical bits contain just two pieces of information (0 and 1, for example, or 1 and 0), two qubits can contain a superposition of four combinations of 0s and 1s simultaneously. Three qubits can contain eight combinations; four qubits, 16 combinations and so on. Each additional qubit doubles the number of combinations: an exponential increase.Someone using a quantum computer must first entangle qubits to harness their exponential computing power. The operator then carries out operations on the qubits, such as addition, multiplication or more complicated computations. Depending on the type of quantum computer, electromagnetic signals or lasers create the entanglement and operations.Though they are capable of exponential computation, quantum computers are limited in the amount of data they can extract from these computations — a fact that’s often lost in popular descriptions giving the impression that quantum computers try every solution to a problem at once.“Different computations can indeed be done in superposition, achieving a kind of parallel computing,” says Stephen Jordan, a Google quantum computing researcher who was a longtime NIST staff member and Joint Center for Quantum Information and Computer Science fellowBut contrary to popular belief, this doesn’t allow quantum computers to do an efficient ‘brute force’ search over all the potential solutions.“The measurement at the end of the computation can only extract a small amount of information about the results of all of these computations,” Jordan explains. “The key is to design the measurement so that it extracts useful information about the whole set of results done in superposition.”(Note: This article describes quantum computers that do computations using logic gates, similar to classical computers. Some scientists and companies are pursuing another technology known as “quantum annealing” that could be used to solve certain physics and optimization problems faster than classical computers can.) What could quantum computers do? At a 1981 gathering of physicists outside Boston, the famous physicist Richard Feynman spoke about the possibility of “simulating physics with computers.” Though other scientists had independently developed similar ideas around the same time, Feynman’s talk is often credited with launching the field of quantum computing.Since then, scientists have explored how quantum computers could, in theory, simulate the fundamental quantum rules that govern molecules, chemicals and materials — something today’s computers can only approximate with great effort. If quantum computers eventually become large and powerful enough, scientists hope that such quantum simulations could bring about major advances in materials science, drug development and other areas. Potentially transformative “killer apps” for quantum simulation could involve discovering a new blockbuster drug or chemical catalysts that make the production of fertilizer or the capture of greenhouse gases from the air more efficient.In 1994, a mathematician named Peter Shor published a paper about a very different application that instantly made quantum computing a national security issue. The algorithms that encrypt much of our data work by multiplying very large prime numbers together to create a secret key — something that’s very hard for classical computers to undo. Shor’s paper described a quantum algorithm that could quickly factor the immense numbers that are products of these huge prime numbers, potentially putting much of the world’s encrypted information at risk.Scientists also believe quantum computers could outpace classical computers at solving complicated optimization problems such as helping companies organize complex processes such as airplane assembly in more efficient ways.Most of these applications are years — perhaps even decades — in the future. But scientists have started to publish papers claiming that quantum computers have demonstrated a “quantum advantage,” meaning they can outdo classical computers for certain tasks. Quantum computers have been used to calculate the energies of small molecules, for example, and simulate the magnetic properties of collections of interacting atoms.So far, none of these early demonstrations have proved truly useful, says Scott Glancy, a physicist at NIST. And in some cases, scientists later showed that traditional computers could equal or exceed the performance of quantum processors for some tasks. The demonstrations do, however, prove that quantum computers work and can be scaled up.“It seems to me we’re just on the threshold of quantum systems doing genuinely new simulations that we can’t do classically,” says Glancy.Beyond these practical applications, quantum computers could offer a new way to probe the fundamental nature of reality. A full-scale quantum computer, if successfully built, would contain some of the most complex quantum states ever created (assuming aliens have not already built such devices). Those states would provide an important, albeit not surprising, confirmation of quantum theory. If, on the other hand, scientists find that a large-scale quantum computer cannot be built, that would be “shocking,” says Glancy. “It might inspire a revolution in physics. In my opinion that is a good reason to build a quantum computer.”Why don’t we have quantum computers today? Qubits are exquisite but fragile. A stray electric or magnetic field, temperature fluctuations or even a cosmic ray can ruin a superposition or entanglement. This forces qubits into a 0 or 1 state in which they act like ordinary bits. Anyone building a quantum computer must find ways to manipulate the qubits carefully while protecting them from outside disturbances.Moreover, a single qubit by itself is worth little. For a quantum device to do something useful, many qubits must be entangled with each other while sustaining superpositions. The best quantum computers today contain hundreds of interconnected qubits and make an error roughly once in every thousand operations. An error changes the state of a qubit, destroying or corrupting the information it carries.(By contrast, a classical computer makes around one error, such as a bit randomly flipping from 0 to 1, for every quintillion — 1 followed up 18 zeroes — calculations. And correcting errors in a classical computer is much easier.)Industry, university and government researchers around the world are racing to make more reliable qubits and build electronics and laser systems that create entanglement more efficiently and robustly. And they are experimenting with many kinds of qubits. In theory, any particle or system that obeys the rules of quantum physics, from atoms to tiny circuits to semiconductors, can act as a qubit.Each qubit has advantages and disadvantages. For example, one of the most popular qubit types uses electrically charged atoms known as ions. The quantum energy states of electrons inside these ions represent the 0s and 1s (and combinations thereof) for quantum computation. Ion qubits can sustain quantum superpositions for a long time, but they are relatively sluggish at performing computations.Square device surrounded by a design of gold wiring.A gold-on-alumina ion trap inside a case that protects ions from electrical interference.Another popular qubit uses tiny circuits made from superconductors — materials that conduct electricity without resistance at very cold temperatures. The behavior of the electrons in the circuits creates quantized energy states that can be used to encode 0s and 1s. These qubits allow for fast computations and can be made using existing chip manufacturing techniques. But their quantum states are more fragile and shorter-lived than those of ion qubits.Colorized micrograph of superconducting circuit-A chip combining a superconducting qubit (pink) for storing quantum information, a quantum bus (green) for transporting information, and a switch (purple) that tunes interactions between the other two components.Scientists are also experimenting with qubits based on arrays of neutral (non-electrically charged) atoms-, atoms embedded in diamonds, particles of light known as photons and small bits of silicon.Some researchers are also trying to develop a radically different type of qubit, known as a “topological” qubit, that would have some built-in immunity to errors. In theory, topological qubits could encode quantum information into the braiding pattern of “quasiparticles” that emerge from the collective behavior of individual particles such as electrons. These braiding patterns, and thus the quantum states, would be protected from some of the outside disturbances that can disrupt other qubits. Topological qubits require temperatures near absolute zero and complicated structures often involving superconducting and semiconducting materials. They have proved challenging to build, and researchers are still seeking definitive evidence that they have managed to make one. Ultimately, quantum computers may marry multiple kinds of qubits so that each can play to its strengths. Superconducting or photonic qubits could crunch through operations quickly, for example, then transfer their information to ion or diamond qubits for storage.Qubit Contenders-Qubit type-Description-Trapped ion-Four circles with plus signs inside a lined up horizontally between two vertical lines.Electrically charged atoms are trapped using electric and/or magnetic fields so that they hover inside a vacuum chamber. Their quantum states can be controlled and measured with laser light and electromagnetic fields.Neutral atom-Lines of red dots are arranged in a diamond shape.Neutral (uncharged) atoms are trapped using laser light so that they hover inside a vacuum chamber. Their quantum states can be controlled and measured with laser light and electromagnetic fields.Superconducting-An outline of a chip shape has one wire going off to the left.Tiny integrated circuits on a chip are cooled to near absolute zero temperature. At these temperatures, the behavior of the electrons in the circuits creates quantized energy states that can be observed and manipulated using weak electromagnetic signals.Semiconducting-Circle is shaded left to right from red to blue.Electrodes are used to trap electrons inside a tiny region of a semiconductor material (such as silicon) that is cooled to near absolute zero. The electron’s quantum state can be controlled and measured with electromagnetic fields.hotonic-A wavy horizontal line has an arrow at the end.Individual particles of light (photons) can encode quantum information in their polarization, wavelength, time of arrival, or even the number of photons. Devices such as beamsplitters and single-photon detectors are used to control and measure the encoded quantum states.Topological-Two vertical lines weave over one another.This hypothetical type of qubit, which has not yet been created in the lab, would encode quantum information by braiding “quasiparticles” that emerge from the collective behavior of individual particles such as electrons. The quantum states would be encoded in how the braid is twisted, helping to protect them from outside disturbances. The states would be controlled and measured using magnetic and electric fields.An overview of some of the most-studied and best-funded qubit types.Where are we headed? In the near term, quantum computer designers hope to build machines that are sophisticated and stable enough to do useful tasks that traditional computers can’t do. Some researchers expect these “noisy intermediate-scale” quantum computers to excel at simulation; others are skeptical. Current quantum computers are being used mainly to explore certain physics, chemistry and mathematical problems and as test beds to understand how to make more powerful quantum computers.For other tasks, such as running Shor’s code-breaking algorithm, a quantum computer may need millions of qubits that can run error-free indefinitely, like our classical computers do. Such a quantum computer is probably still much further away. (Even so, NIST has developed new algorithms that are thought to be quantum computer-proof and is encouraging businesses and government agencies to adopt them. Learn more about post-quantum cryptography.)Many experts believe that because they are so complex and delicate, quantum computers will probably never sit on or desks or in our pockets. Rather, they may live inside commercial computing centers, national labs and universities, where they will crunch quantum information and deliver solutions that make our world smarter, safer and more efficient.

CERN's headquarters is located in Meyrin, a suburb of Geneva, Switzerland. It was established in 1954 and is known as the European Organization for Nuclear Research.

CERN
https://home.cern/

ATLAS gets under the hood of the Higgs mechanism-The detection of longitudinally polarised W boson production at the Large Hadron Collider is an important step towards understanding how the primordial electroweak symmetry broke, giving rise to the masses of elementary particles-10 April, 2025-By ATLAS collaboration.

Display of a candidate event for the production of two W+ bosons via vector-boson scattering, followed by their decay into two muons and two muon neutrinos. The muons are represented by the red lines in the inner detector and the muon spectrometer, and the two jets by the yellow cones. Display of a candidate event for the production of two W+ bosons via vector-boson scattering, followed by their decay into two muons and two muon neutrinos. The muons are represented by the red lines in the inner detector and the muon spectrometer, and the two jets by the yellow cones. The discovery of the Higgs boson by the ATLAS and CMS collaborations at CERN in 2012 opened a new window on the innermost workings of the Universe. It revealed the existence of a mysterious, ancient field with which elementary particles interact to acquire their all-important masses. This process is governed by a delicate mechanism called electroweak symmetry breaking, which was first proposed in 1964 but remains among the least understood phenomena of the Standard Model of particle physics. To probe this critical mechanism in the evolution of the Universe, physicists require a very large dataset of high-energy particle collisions.Last week, at the Rencontres de Moriond conference, the ATLAS collaboration brought physicists a step closer to understanding the nature of the electroweak symmetry-breaking mechanism. Using the full proton-proton collision dataset from LHC Run 2, which was collected at an energy of 13 TeV from 2015 to 2018, the team presented the first evidence of a key process involving the W boson – one of the mediators of the weak force. In the Standard Model of particle physics, the electromagnetic and the weak interactions are two sides of the same coin, unified as the electroweak interaction. It is thought that the electroweak interaction prevailed in the immediate aftermath of the Big Bang, when the Universe was extremely hot. But the symmetry between the two interactions somehow got broken, since the carriers of the weak interaction, the W and Z bosons, are observed to be massive, whereas the photon, which mediates the electromagnetic interaction, is massless. The breaking of this symmetry is realised in the Standard Model through the Brout-Englert-Higgs (BEH) mechanism. The discovery of the Higgs boson provided the first experimental confirmation of this mechanism. The next step is to measure the properties of the new particle, in particular how strongly it interacts with other elementary particles. These measurements are currently under way, with the aim of confirming that the masses of elementary matter particles are also the result of their interaction with the BEH field.But the BEH mechanism also makes other predictions. Two processes in particular need to be measured to confirm that the mechanism is indeed as the Standard Model predicts: the interaction between longitudinally polarised W or Z bosons and the interaction of the Higgs boson with itself. While studies of Higgs self-interaction are expected to be possible at the earliest with the High-Luminosity LHC, which is due to begin operation in 2030, and will require a future collider to be pinned down in detail, first studies of the scattering of longitudinally polarised gauge bosons should be possible earlier.For particles, polarisation refers to the way in which their spin is oriented in space. Longitudinally polarised particles have their spin perpendicular to the direction of their momentum, something that is only possible for particles that have mass. The existence of longitudinally polarised W and Z bosons (WL and ZL) is a direct consequence of the BEH mechanism, and the way in which these states interact with each other is therefore a very sensitive test of how the electroweak symmetry is broken. Studying this interaction should allow physicists to tell whether the symmetry breaking is realised via the minimal BEH mechanism or whether some new physics beyond the Standard Model is involved. The new ATLAS result provides a first glimpse of this elusive process.The WL-WL interaction can be probed experimentally in proton-proton collisions by studying a process called vector-boson scattering (VBS). The VBS process can be visualised as a quark in each of the incoming protons emitting a W boson and those two W bosons interacting with each other, producing a pair of W or Z bosons. VBS can be identified by looking for collisions containing the decay products of the two bosons together with the two quarks that participated in the interaction forming two jets of particles going in opposite directions.The new ATLAS analysis targets collisions in which the two W bosons decay into an electron or a muon and their respective neutrinos. In order to suppress backgrounds, mostly from processes involving top-quark pair production, both leptons are required to be of the same electrical charge. The experimental signature is thus a pair of same-charge leptons (electron-electron, muon-muon or electron-muon), two particle “jets” with opposite directions produced by the decays of the quarks, and missing energy coming from the undetectable neutrinos.Once candidates for the VBS process are selected, the polarisation of the W bosons has to be determined. This is very challenging and can be done only via a thorough analysis of correlations between the directions of the reconstructed electrons and muons and the properties of other particles produced in the interaction. Dedicated neural networks have been trained to distinguish between transverse and longitudinal polarisation and made it possible to extract the final result: evidence with the statistical significance of 3.3 sigma that at least one of the two W bosons was longitudinally polarised.“This measurement is a milestone in the studies of the core physics value via polarised boson interactions in vector-boson scattering processes,” says Yusheng Wu, the ATLAS Standard Model group convener. “It marks a path towards the eventual study of longitudinally polarised boson scattering using LHC Run-3 and HL-LHC data.”

CMS finds unexpected excess of top quarks-Data from the CMS experiment at CERN’s Large Hadron Collider reveals an intriguing excess of top-quark pairs, hinting at the first observation of a composite particle with unique properties-3 April, 2025

The CMS collaboration at CERN has observed an unexpected feature in data produced by the Large Hadron Collider (LHC), which could point to the existence of the smallest composite particle yet observed. The result, reported at the Rencontres de Moriond conference in the Italian Alps this week, suggests that top quarks – the heaviest and shortest lived of all the elementary particles – can momentarily pair up with their antimatter counterparts to produce an object called toponium. Other explanations cannot be ruled out, however, as the existence of toponium was thought too difficult to verify at the LHC, and the result will need to be further scrutinised by CMS’s sister experiment, ATLAS.High-energy collisions between protons at the LHC routinely produce top quark–antiquark pairs (tt-bar). Measuring the probability, or cross section, of tt-bar production is both an important test of the Standard Model of particle physics and a powerful way to search for the existence of new particles that are not described by the 50-year-old theory. Many of the open questions in particle physics, such as the nature of dark matter, motivate the search for new particles that may be too heavy to have been produced in experiments so far.CMS researchers were analysing a large sample of tt-bar production data collected in 2016–2018 to search for new types of Higgs bosons when they spotted something unusual. Additional Higgs-like particles are predicted in many extensions of the Standard Model. If they exist, such particles are expected to interact most strongly with the singularly massive top quark, which weighs in at 184 times the mass of the proton. And if they are massive enough to decay into a top quark–antiquark pair, this should dominate the way they decay inside detectors, with the two massive quarks splintering into “jets” of particles.Observing more top–antitop pairs than expected is therefore often considered to be a smoking gun for the presence of additional Higgs-like bosons. The CMS data showed just such a surplus. Intriguingly, however, the collaboration observed the excess top-quark pairs at the minimum energy required to produce a pair of top quarks. This led the team to consider an alternative hypothesis long considered difficult to detect: a short-lived union of a top quark and a top antiquark, or toponium.While tt-bar pairs do not form stable bound states, calculations in quantum chromodynamics – which describes how the strong nuclear force binds quarks into hadrons – predict bound-state enhancements at the tt-bar production threshold. Though other explanations – including an elementary boson such as appears in models with additional Higgs bosons – cannot be ruled out, the cross section that CMS obtains for a simplified toponium-production hypothesis is 8.8 picobarns with an uncertainty of about 15%. This passes the “five sigma” level of certainty required to claim an observation in particle physics, and makes it extremely unlikely that the excess is just a statistical fluctuation.If the result is confirmed, toponium would be the final example of quarkonium – a term for unstable quark–antiquark states formed from pairings of the heavier charm, bottom and perhaps top quarks. Charmonium (charm–anticharm) was discovered simultaneously at Stanford National Accelerator Laboratory in California and Brookhaven National Laboratory in New York in the November Revolution in particle physics of 1974. Bottomonium (bottom–antibottom) was discovered at Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory in Illinois in 1977. Charmonium and bottomonium are approximately 0.6 and 0.4 femtometres in size respectively, where one femtometre is a millionth of a nanometre. Bottomonium is thought to be the smallest hadron yet discovered. Given its larger mass, toponium is expected to be far smaller – qualifying it as the smallest known hadron.For a long time, it was thought that toponium bound states were unlikely to be detected in hadron–hadron collisions. The top quark decays into a bottom quark and a W boson in the time it takes light to travel just 0.1 femtometre – a fraction of the size of the particle itself. Toponium would therefore be unique among quarkonia in that its decay would be triggered by the spontaneous disintegration of one of its constituent quarks rather than by the mutual annihilation of its matter and antimatter components.CMS and ATLAS are now working closely to study the effect, which remains an open scientific question.

ATLAS probes the Higgs mechanism in the scattering of W boson-4 April 2025 | By ATLAS Collaboration

The W and Z bosons – the carriers of the weak force – offer unique insights into the fundamental interactions of nature. Unlike massless particles such as photons, these massive bosons can exist in a “longitudinally polarised” state, where their spin can be oriented perpendicular to their direction of motion. This behaviour arises directly from the Higgs mechanism, which gives the particles their mass. By precisely measuring this polarisation – particularly in rare processes like vector boson scattering (VBS) – physicists perform powerful tests of the Standard Model.In a new study presented at the Moriond EW conference, the ATLAS Collaboration reported the first evidence – with 3.3σ significance – of vector boson scattering involving longitudinally polarised, same-sign W bosons. The new analysis also established stringent limits on “doubly longitudinally polarised” VBS, where both W bosons are longitudinally polarised. These results were achieved through an analysis of the complete LHC Run 2 dataset, combining innovative analysis methods with the full statistical power of the collected data.VBS interactions can occur through several processes, including the remarkable self-interactions of W and Z bosons (Figures 1a and 1b) and interactions involving the Higgs boson (Figure 1c). This latter interaction is particularly interesting, as it is a direct probe of the electroweak symmetry breaking mechanism of the Higgs.ATLAS reported the first evidence – with 3.3σ significance – of vector boson scattering involving longitudinally polarised, same-sign W bosons.All three production mechanisms can create the same remarkable experimental signature: two same-sign W bosons decaying into leptons (electrons and muons), with the outgoing quarks appearing as jets with large angular separation in the ATLAS detector. As shown in the event display, the two same-sign charged leptons are accompanied by two particle jets near the LHC beamline. The polarisation of the W bosons is reflected in the distinct kinematic and angular properties of the recorded leptons and jets.However, fully reconstructing the kinematics of these W bosons is prevented by the presence of neutrinos, which pass through the ATLAS experiment without leaving a trace. Further, spotting the most interesting events – in which both W bosons are longitudinally polarised – is especially difficult, as it accounts for only about 10% of same-sign WW events. To address these challenges, researchers developed specialised deep neural networks (DNNs) to differentiate background processes and identify the various polarization states of same-sign WW events (see Figure 2). For instance, these DNNs are designed to distinguish between WW events where both W bosons are longitudinally polarised, only one is longitudinally polarised, or neither are.There remains much to be learned about the Higgs mechanism and scattering of polarised W bosons. The novel techniques developed for this new study pave the way for the future measurements. ATLAS researchers look forward to collecting and analysing data from the ongoing LHC Run 3, as the sensitivity to the rare scattering processes will only continue to grow with more data.

Displaced but not unnoticed: ATLAS in pursuit of Long-Lived Particles-1 April 2025 | By ATLAS Collaboration

Despite its wide-ranging success, the Standard Model leaves some of the universe’s deepest mysteries unanswered. What is dark matter? Why does matter dominate over antimatter? Given how no beyond-the-Standard-Model phenomena have yet been observed at the Large Hadron Collider (LHC), a question naturally arises: are physicists searching in the right place? Figure 1: The expected and observed 95% confidence-limit on the branching fraction of the Higgs boson to a pair of scalar long-lived particles (s) as a function of the proper decay length (𝑐𝜏). The limit obtained in this analysis is shown in green, while the limit of the two displaced vertex search is displayed in red. The combined limit is shown in blue. (Image: ATLAS Collaboration/CERN) Experiments at the LHC were designed based on the assumption that particles produced in a collision would decay near the interaction point. However, many extensions of the Standard Model predict the existence of long-lived particles (LLPs) that could travel several metres before decaying, leaving behind tracks that are “displaced” from the interaction point. Detecting LLPs is challenging due to their feeble interactions and unconventional decay signatures, requiring innovative reconstruction and analysis strategies. Conversely, their unique signatures also offer exciting discovery opportunities.In a new study submitted to Physical Review D, scientists at the ATLAS experiment leveraged the muon spectrometer’s size and precision tracking capabilities to search for neutral LLPs by identifying displaced decay vertices (DVs). The team analysed the full LHC Run 2 dataset (collected 2015–2018), searching for collision events with a single DV in the muon spectrometer and isolated from activity in other detector subsystems. They used a specialized vertex reconstruction algorithm to infer the point of origin of hadronic jets, a collimated spray of particles, emanating from the LLP decay.Long-lived particles are challenging to detect, due to their feeble interactions and unconventional decay signatures. Conversely, those very traits also offer exciting opportunities for discovery.Figure 2: Comparison of the expected and observed 95% confidence-limit on the Z+ALP production cross-section, where the ALP decays into a pair of gluons. The limit obtained in this analysis is shown in green and is compared to the results of two previous ATLAS searches using predominantly the ATLAS inner detector (red) and the ATLAS hadronic calorimeter (blue). (Image: ATLAS Collaboration/CERN) The results were interpreted through two scenarios: one where the LLP is produced with a Standard Model Z boson, and one where it is not. The first scenario includes a search for an axion-like particle (ALP) – a theoretical particle tied to an additional fundamental symmetry in the Universe. The second scenario explores a new-physics model where the Higgs boson would act as a gateway to an undiscovered sector of particles and would decay into a pair of LLPs.This new study marks a significant leap forward. Unlike previous analyses, which focused on collision events with two vertices or used only a subset of the Run 2 dataset, ATLAS’ new result explores a wider range of particle lifetimes (see Figure 1). In addition to leveraging machine-learning techniques to distinguish LLP signals from Standard-Model backgrounds, this analysis also extends the sensitivity to include single LLP production mechanisms compared to previous iterations. While the study did not reveal an excess of events indicative of LLPs, the team significantly improved exclusion limits for various LLP benchmark models, covering proper decay lengths up to 1000m. For ALPs, the most stringent ATLAS exclusion limits were set for proper decay lengths exceeding 20cm (see Figure 2).Given the rarity of LLP interactions, the growing dataset from Run 3 and beyond offers promising opportunities for discovery. Enhanced by hardware and software upgrades and innovative analysis approaches, the ATLAS Collaboration is well-positioned to push the boundaries of particle physics at the highest energies.