Critical comment on the recent microscopic black hole search at the LHC

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

12 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Recently the CMS Collaboration at the LHC reported "the first direct limit on black hole production at a particle accelerator" using a data sample corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 35 pb-1 of pp collision at a center of mass energy of 7 TeV (Khachatryan et al., 2011) [1]. Even though the result has a strong impact on future searches, the interpretation lacks enough theoretical support. In this Letter, we show that the parameter range which was considered by the CMS Collaboration is actually out of the validity range of semi-classical black hole picture so that the Monte Carlo simulation result which was crucially used in the analysis still needs further solid scientific basis.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)587-590
Number of pages4
JournalPhysics Letters, Section B: Nuclear, Elementary Particle and High-Energy Physics
Volume701
Issue number5
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2011 Jul 27

Bibliographical note

Funding Information:
I appreciate valuable communications and discussions with K.-y. Oda, D. Ida, H. Yoshino, M. Mangano, S. Giddings, J. Frost, M. Cavaglia, D. Stojkovic, S. Mukohyama, S. Sugimoto, M. Nojiri and D. Orlando. This research was supported by Basic Science Research Program through the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) funded by the Ministry of Education, Science and Technology ( 2011-0010294 ). At the early stage of the work, this work was supported by the World Premier International Research Center Initiative (WPI initiative) by MEXT and also by the Grant-in-Aid for scientific research (Young Scientists (B) 21740172 ) from JSPS during my stay at IPMU, the University of Tokyo.

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Nuclear and High Energy Physics

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Critical comment on the recent microscopic black hole search at the LHC'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this