Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : ahhaha's ahs -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: sixty2nds who wrote (21763)	9/5/2012 1:55:05 PM
From: The Wharf	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 24758

i thought that would be easy for you to figure out as I still have not figured out what you wrote to me.

To: sixty2nds who wrote (21763)	9/5/2012 4:00:09 PM
From: ahhaha	Respond to of 24758

The bottom - anti bottom production channel is critical to establishing the identity of the anomaly at 125 GEV. The top Feynman diagram is way more energetic. The bottom diagram was claimed to be a valid branch, but the top rapidity was too high and branching ratio of the bottom diagram too low to have confidence in that claim in that top process drowns out the bottom. It would be extremely valuable to have that explicit branch confirmed. On July 1 CMS claimed there was absolutely no data to support it. That's why the data mining find and declaration three days later remains unsound. On July 4, integrated results from accumulated data were announced where the accumulation has been proceeding for several years. Meanwhile the collaborations were already finding "no gos". The "no gos" have been put aside. Not for me,and surprisingly, not for Michael Peskin. Like Ellis, he wants to believe but...