Disproof of Graviity :New LHC results suggest there's a flaw in the standard model of physics

This is a great article.
By Fiona MacDonald.

http://www.sciencealert.com/the-latest-lhc-findings-hint-at-strange-physics-beyond-the-standard-model

"Right now, the standard model is the best explanation we have for how the Universe works and how it's held together. But there are big gaps - most noticeably, the fact that the model doesn't actually account for gravity"

It goes on to explain other errors that physics cannot account for. This model does account for these issues. Why things are organized in threes. Density instead of gravity. How to manage motion without gravity.

It is nice to see type LHC working on these problems.

W+ 4 jet production

It is good to evaluate other models and systems. It helps to strengthen current models. This comes from Tommaso Dorigo at Science 2.0 W Plus Multijet Production Pinned Down

The original paper is http://arxiv.org/abs/1009.2338

These are QCD papers on the 4 jet production of W+ Bosons.

QCD is the primary discussion of the Standard Model.

Atlas : Jet Events

Congratulations on the work all of you have done to build these detectors.

This is the main paper with data. Although I had some difficulty in downloading it.


http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/0901/0901.0512.pdf
This paper is huge. 1100+ pages. This paper does not download correctly using any web browser.


http://cdsweb.cern.ch/record/1254503/files/ATL-PHYS-SLIDE-2010-036.pdf
This paper is far more manageable. It is only 29 pages.

I have questions: On pages 8 and 10 of the smaller doc. MC is that Mass*C or is it Muon Candidate? Do those lines going through the data point show the min/max of the run? How many runs were put together to create those maps?

On page 8, why are there data points outside the line? Is the line what you expect and the data point is what you get?

Are these all simulations and what you EXPECT to see, or are these based on real data? That is what I understood from the conclusions. That these maps are simulations. The conclusion says you expect to see the Higg's at these points. Not that you did. Am I correct in that statement?

Why are the maps in 2d and not the expected 3d? I would expect to see the energy, distance, and time to be the factors of any broken vibrations. The general questions are: How did the energy transform over time? Was there a general direction these broken energies transformed over time? When did the baryon transform into heat, electricity, or magnetism?