The One Reason That Physicists Won’t Give Up on Supersymmetry
Why Read This
What Makes This Article Worth Your Time
Summary
What This Article Is About
Ethan Siegel explores why physicists remain committed to supersymmetry (SUSY) despite the Large Hadron Collider’s complete failure to detect any supersymmetric partner particles. The compelling reason lies in the hierarchy problem—a theoretical pathology where quantum field theory predicts that fundamental particle masses should be enormous (around the Planck mass) rather than the tiny values we actually observe. Just as the predicted positron solved the electron’s self-energy problem in the 1930s by providing an antimatter counterpart that canceled pathological infinities, SUSY proposes partner particles for every Standard Model particle to protect the Higgs boson and other particles from acquiring impossibly large masses.
Siegel traces the historical parallel between Dirac’s theoretical prediction of the positron (confirmed four years later in 1932) and modern hopes for SUSY, explaining how quantum field theory generates divergent contributions to particle masses through loop diagrams involving virtual particles. While SUSY also promises benefits like potential dark matter candidates and support for Grand Unification, only the mass protection problem represents a genuine theoretical necessity. The article concludes by acknowledging that the LHC has already probed the energy ranges where SUSY particles should exist to solve the hierarchy problem, forcing physicists to confront whether this elegant theoretical solution reflects reality or remains merely beautiful mathematics disconnected from nature.
Key Points
Main Takeaways
Historical Precedent
Dirac’s 1928 prediction of the positron to solve electron self-energy problems was confirmed experimentally in 1932, establishing the pattern SUSY hopes to repeat.
The Hierarchy Problem
Quantum field theory predicts particle masses around 10²² MeV, yet observed masses range from neutrinos (< 0.0005 MeV) to top quarks (~173,000 MeV)—billions of times smaller.
SUSY’s Mass Protection
Supersymmetric partner particles with opposite spin statistics could cancel divergent contributions to particle masses, preventing them from blowing up to Planck-scale values.
Vacuum Polarization Mechanism
Just as virtual electron-positron pairs screen electron charges in quantum vacuums, SUSY particles would screen Standard Model particles from pathological mass contributions through loop diagrams.
Experimental Failure
The Large Hadron Collider has probed the entire energy range where SUSY particles should exist to solve the hierarchy problem, finding zero evidence for any superpartners.
Theory Versus Experiment
SUSY remains attractive because alternative solutions to the hierarchy problem have failed even more comprehensively, despite Feynman’s warning that beautiful theories contradicted by experiment are simply wrong.
Master Reading Comprehension
Practice with 365 curated articles and 2,400+ questions across 9 RC types.
Article Analysis
Breaking Down the Elements
Main Idea
Mass Protection Necessity
Supersymmetry persists as a theoretical framework not primarily for its aesthetic appeal or additional benefits like dark matter candidates, but because it addresses a fundamental problem in quantum field theory: explaining why observed particle masses don’t diverge to impossibly large values as theory predicts. The hierarchy problem represents a genuine pathology requiring resolution, making SUSY compelling despite experimental silence, much as the positron’s prediction resolved the electron’s self-energy crisis before experimental confirmation.
Purpose
To Explain Persistence
Siegel aims to clarify why theoretical physicists maintain commitment to supersymmetry despite the Large Hadron Collider’s null results, distinguishing between weak motivations (dark matter, Grand Unification) and the compelling core reason: mass protection. By drawing historical parallels with the positron’s prediction and exploring quantum field theory’s structural requirements, he demonstrates that SUSY addresses an authentic theoretical necessity rather than mere aesthetic preference, while honestly acknowledging that experimental failure in the relevant energy range severely challenges the theory’s viability.
Structure
Historical Analogy → Technical Problem → Current Status
The article opens with classical electrostatics and the electron self-energy puzzle, transitions through Dirac’s theoretical innovation and the positron’s discovery, then applies this template to modern particle physics by explaining how quantum field theory generates divergent mass contributions through loop diagrams, how SUSY would resolve these pathologies through superpartner cancellation, and finally confronts the disconnect between theoretical elegance and experimental reality. This progression from solved historical precedent to unsolved contemporary crisis creates narrative tension while making sophisticated quantum field theory concepts accessible through analogy.
Tone
Pedagogical, Balanced & Sobering
Siegel maintains an instructive tone that carefully builds understanding from accessible classical concepts through increasingly sophisticated quantum field theory, while balancing respect for SUSY’s theoretical motivations against honest acknowledgment of experimental failure. His approach neither dismisses theorists as deluded nor overstates SUSY’s case, instead presenting the hierarchy problem’s genuine difficulty while noting that the LHC’s null results in the relevant energy range fundamentally challenge whether elegant mathematical solutions necessarily reflect physical reality, concluding with Feynman’s pragmatic reminder about experiment’s ultimate authority.
Key Terms
Vocabulary from the Article
Click each card to reveal the definition
Build your vocabulary systematically
Each article in our course includes 8-12 vocabulary words with contextual usage.
Tough Words
Challenging Vocabulary
Tap each card to flip and see the definition
An extremely small unit of length equal to 10⁻¹⁵ meters, used to measure nuclear and subatomic particle dimensions, also called a fermi.
“You’d find that the electron was about 2.9 femtometers in radius, or more than three times larger than the actual size of a proton.”
Relating to stationary electric charges or fields, particularly the forces, energies, and potentials associated with charges at rest rather than in motion.
“This would imply that the electron’s total electrostatic energy diverges: it goes to infinity as we take the radius of the electron down toward zero.”
A massless particle arising when a continuous symmetry is spontaneously broken, named after physicist Jeffrey Goldstone who proved their theoretical necessity.
“The breaking of the Higgs symmetry gives rise to Goldstone bosons, and those bosons mix (or ‘get eaten by’) the electroweak bosons.”
The hypothetical supersymmetric partner particle of a quark, predicted to be a boson with the same charge properties but integer spin instead of half-integer.
“The contributions from the top quark could be canceled out from a supersymmetric partner particle known as a stop, which would be a boson-like SUSY particle known as a squark.”
The hypothetical supersymmetric partner of the Higgs boson, predicted to be a fermion that would help cancel the Higgs boson’s pathological mass contributions.
“The self-coupling from the Higgs boson would be canceled by its SUSY partner: a fermion-like SUSY particle known as a Higgsino.”
In a manner showing great depth of knowledge, insight, or feeling; having far-reaching implications or effects that fundamentally transform understanding.
“The experimental and observational discovery of subatomic particles came alongside developments in quantum field theory, profoundly revolutionizing our conception of existence.”
Reading Comprehension
Test Your Understanding
5 questions covering different RC question types
1According to the article, Dirac’s prediction of the positron preceded its experimental detection by several years.
2What is the hierarchy problem in particle physics?
3Which sentence best captures why the hierarchy problem is considered the most compelling reason to pursue supersymmetry?
4Evaluate these statements about how SUSY would solve the mass protection problem:
Every Standard Model fermion would have a supersymmetric boson partner, and every Standard Model boson would have a supersymmetric fermion partner.
SUSY partner particles would cancel divergent contributions to particle masses through loop diagrams, similar to how positrons screen electron self-energy.
The Large Hadron Collider has found indirect evidence for SUSY particles at energies just beyond current detection capabilities.
Select True or False for all three statements, then click “Check Answers”
5Based on the article’s conclusion and Feynman quote, what can we infer about the future of supersymmetry research?
FAQ
Frequently Asked Questions
Dirac’s equation for the electron allowed negative energy solutions that implied no lowest-energy state, creating a pathology where electrons could continuously emit energy descending into progressively negative states. By hypothesizing the positron as an antimatter counterpart filling these negative states, the theory became self-consistent. The positron’s opposite charge creates vacuum polarization effects that “screen” the electron from divergent self-energy contributions, allowing its observed small mass to remain stable rather than blowing up to infinite values as naive calculations would suggest.
Supersymmetric partner particles would have identical electric charge, color charge, weak isospin, and weak hypercharge as their Standard Model counterparts but differ by half a unit of spin. This means matter particles (fermions with half-integer spin like electrons and quarks) would have boson partners (like selectrons and squarks with integer spin), while force carriers (bosons like photons) would have fermion partners (like photinos). This spin difference is crucial because bosons and fermions contribute opposite signs to loop diagrams, enabling SUSY partners to cancel the divergent mass contributions from Standard Model particles.
The LHC has already probed energies up to a few TeV (tens of times greater than the heaviest Standard Model particle) without detecting any superpartner particles. This is problematic because SUSY was specifically proposed to solve the hierarchy problem at these energy scales—if superpartners exist at much higher energies, they can’t effectively cancel the mass contributions that create the hierarchy problem. The null results suggest either that SUSY doesn’t exist in nature, or that if it does exist at higher energy scales, it may not actually solve the mass protection problem that represents its most compelling theoretical motivation.
Readlite provides curated articles with comprehensive analysis including summaries, key points, vocabulary building, and practice questions across 9 different RC question types. Our Ultimate Reading Course offers 365 articles with 2,400+ questions to systematically improve your reading comprehension skills.
This article is classified as Advanced difficulty because it requires understanding sophisticated quantum field theory concepts including self-energy divergences, loop diagrams, vacuum polarization, and the Higgs mechanism, while following complex analogical reasoning between historical (positron) and contemporary (SUSY) theoretical developments. It employs specialized technical vocabulary, references multiple layers of physics theory from classical electrostatics through quantum mechanics to the Standard Model, and demands sustained attention to abstract mathematical arguments about why particles have the masses they do rather than diverging to infinite or Planck-scale values.
The article identifies two secondary motivations: First, if R-parity symmetry is imposed and the lightest supersymmetric particle is chargeless, SUSY could provide a dark matter candidate, though Siegel notes there are hundreds of alternative ways to generate dark matter theoretically. Second, the addition of SUSY particles causes the three fundamental coupling constants (electromagnetic, weak, and strong) to converge near a hypothetical Grand Unification scale, suggesting forces might unify at high energies. However, Siegel emphasizes these are “nice, but not compelling” because they’re not necessary theoretical requirements—only the hierarchy problem represents a genuine pathology demanding resolution.
The Ultimate Reading Course covers 9 RC question types: Multiple Choice, True/False, Multi-Statement T/F, Text Highlight, Fill in the Blanks, Matching, Sequencing, Error Spotting, and Short Answer. This comprehensive coverage prepares you for any reading comprehension format you might encounter.
