Reply to "There is no 690 GeV resonance"
Fuente:
arXiv
Enregistré dans:
| Auteurs principaux: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Preprint |
| Publié: |
2025
|
| Sujets: | |
| Accès en ligne: | |
| Tags: |
Ajouter un tag
Pas de tags, Soyez le premier à ajouter un tag!
|
| _version_ | 1866912625160355840 |
|---|---|
| author | Consoli, M. Cosmai, L. Fabbri, F. Rupp, G. |
| author_facet | Consoli, M. Cosmai, L. Fabbri, F. Rupp, G. |
| contents | In a recent note [1], J. M. Cline criticised our idea that, besides the known Higgs boson with mass $m_h=$ 125 GeV, the Higgs field $\cal H$ could exhibit a relatively narrow, second resonance with theoretical mass $(M_H)^{\rm Theor} = 690\,(30)$ GeV. His criticism addresses both the basic theory part as well as our phenomenological analysis, in which we show that the characteristic, experimental signature of the proposed new resonance may already be visible in various LHC data. As for the comparison with experiment, Cline altogether ignores our most recent article [2], except for its title, and limits himself to just show an old plot from a preprint from five years ago. For this reason, as far as the phenomenology is concerned, there is nothing to reply to. Instead, we will briefly reply to his criticism on the theoretical part. Our conclusion is that Cline has completely ignored basic aspects of our work. |
| format | Preprint |
| id |
arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2509_24984 |
| institution | arXiv |
| publishDate | 2025 |
| record_format | arxiv |
| spellingShingle | Reply to "There is no 690 GeV resonance" Consoli, M. Cosmai, L. Fabbri, F. Rupp, G. High Energy Physics - Phenomenology In a recent note [1], J. M. Cline criticised our idea that, besides the known Higgs boson with mass $m_h=$ 125 GeV, the Higgs field $\cal H$ could exhibit a relatively narrow, second resonance with theoretical mass $(M_H)^{\rm Theor} = 690\,(30)$ GeV. His criticism addresses both the basic theory part as well as our phenomenological analysis, in which we show that the characteristic, experimental signature of the proposed new resonance may already be visible in various LHC data. As for the comparison with experiment, Cline altogether ignores our most recent article [2], except for its title, and limits himself to just show an old plot from a preprint from five years ago. For this reason, as far as the phenomenology is concerned, there is nothing to reply to. Instead, we will briefly reply to his criticism on the theoretical part. Our conclusion is that Cline has completely ignored basic aspects of our work. |
| title | Reply to "There is no 690 GeV resonance" |
| topic | High Energy Physics - Phenomenology |
| url | https://arxiv.org/abs/2509.24984 |