World Scientific
Skip main navigation

Cookies Notification

We use cookies on this site to enhance your user experience. By continuing to browse the site, you consent to the use of our cookies. Learn More
×

System Upgrade on Tue, May 28th, 2024 at 2am (EDT)

Existing users will be able to log into the site and access content. However, E-commerce and registration of new users may not be available for up to 12 hours.
For online purchase, please visit us again. Contact us at customercare@wspc.com for any enquiries.
https://doi.org/10.1142/9781786341129_0012Cited by:0 (Source: Crossref)
Abstract:

The 13 superjet events had only started to stir up trouble in CDF when Giromini came up with something even harder to deal with. There had, in truth, been warnings that their anomalous observation would be the beginning of a bigger story. A significant portion of Frascati's CDF note 4348, the main documentation of the superjet analysis, dealt with the description of a new physics mechanism which could be the source of the observed signature. The note also included some preliminary tests of how that hypothesis could fit the numerical excess of W+2 or 3 jet events as well as explain their kinematics. The Superjet godparent committee had been specifically asked to stay clear of that part of the documentation, at least in a first phase of the review, and only focus on ensuring the correctness of the analysis.