[mctavjb9]

This result should be taken with a large chunk of NaCl until the analysis is internally approved by the collaboration and peer reviewed. Although it's been a while since I got my Ph.D. in experimental particle physics, I do remember that di-photon data sets are subject to significant sources of background from a variety of decay processes that produce one photon + a jet of hadrons, 2 jets, a Z boson decaying to electrons etc. Accurately filtering out and estimating the purity of the data sample is crucial, particularly when claiming the discovery of a new particle. My money is on a some combination of a statistical fluctuation, an inaccurately modeled background, or mis-estimated systematic uncertainty that is creating an artificial "bump." I look forward to being proven wrong and hope that ATLAS and CMS discover something so that high-energy physics doesn't go down in the dustbin of history because it's gotten too bloated and expensive to sustain.