Hacker News Reader

HNHacker News

Top New Best Ask Show Jobs

Comment by avpix | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

avpix·

19, each corresponding to a physical quantity that can be measured.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematical_formulation_of_th...

View on HN

See https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/172846/free-para... for the other options.

Could you help me with which variable we should focus on?

> Could you help me with which variable we should focus on?

I'm not sure what you mean... I'm not asking anyone to focus on anything?!

The answers I linked suggest several different numbers, e.g. 19, 25, 26, I've heard people suggest adding even more "non-Higgs caused masses" since "neutrinos have those and you should add all parameters you can't find theoretical reasons to rule out"...)

> answers I linked suggest several different numbers, e.g. 19, 25, 26

But there is no actual ambiguity. 19 in the original formulation. 26 with the PMNS bolt-on. Other numbers with other bolt-ons. The argument is over the extensions.

It was about the phrase "the standard model", which doesn't specify what "extensions" are implied. You seem to think it means "no extensions" to a somewhat arbitrarily chosen step of the evolution, which has 19 free parameters. I don't think that's how most people use the phrase. As far as I can tell, we are in complete agreement on all other points...

I still think my original comment, which seems to have given you offense for some reason, was completely appropriate. "The standard model" means "state of the art particle physics without highly speculative stuff", at least until we have a paradigm shift.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com