> These aren't really "discoveries". These particles were already known to exist (or, to be precise, whose existence was predicted by the Standard Model, just like the Higgs boson). This is just the first time they have actually been observed.
But doesn't that make it a discovery? Sure, a discovery of something already predicted by the Standard Model, but unless it has been observed, we just don't know for sure if it actually exists.
The Standard Model just has been very successful at predicting stuff :)
To my way of thinking one of the defining characteristics of a discovery is that it is unexpected, so a confirmation of a theoretical prediction doesn't count.
But doesn't that make it a discovery? Sure, a discovery of something already predicted by the Standard Model, but unless it has been observed, we just don't know for sure if it actually exists. The Standard Model just has been very successful at predicting stuff :)