Q: Why did it take 10 years to analyze the data? For this latest measurement, we had available a large data sample of 4 million W bosons collected during the entire CDF run from 2002 till 2011. We developed many new analysis techniques. We implemented new ideas to use our data in novel ways to calibrate our experimental apparatus much more precisely than in the past. We also incorporated new information about the colliding proton's structure, that the particle physics community has collected over the last decade. Importantly, our analysis procedures demonstrate a number of very precise checks of internal consistency, which no other experiment has demonstrated at this level. The combination of a four times larger dataset, more insightful methods and ideas of using our data, and new information about the proton structure allowed us to improve the precision of this measurement substantially. In this paper we have described fifteen new ideas or improved techniques, which were developed over the last 10 years since our 2012 publication. In a separate paper, I also published the method of using cosmic rays to pin down the positions of 30,000 sensor wires, each with a precision of one micron. These high-precision sensor wires, placed at high voltage in a gaseous volume, record the passage of electrons and muons emanating from the W boson decay. We use the data from these sensors to measure the momentum of each electron and muon with high accuracy. This is one of the innovations that helped make our latest measurement more precise than all previous measurements combined. To conceive of these ideas, to implement them and to check the results carefully are all part of the research process. Understanding data of such high statistics with extreme precision is always challenging. Every time we were faced with a puzzle, our philosophy was to leave no stone unturned until the mystery was solved. Q: Is it true that this measurement of the mass of the boson is the most difficult to achieve in particle physics? Could you give me some elements to understand why it is so difficult? Yes this is true. The reason is that the W boson decays to a neutrino, accompanied by an electron or a muon. The neutrino is undetectable, so its energy and direction are really difficult to infer. Secondly, the electron and muon have to be measured with a precision of 0.004%. This requires the understanding of minute effects at the level of parts per million. This is an unprecedented level of accuracy, never achieved in collider physics before this publication. Q: Expect me to confirm that 7 sigma is a 1 in 780 billion chance that the result was due to chance? Let us say that the chance of a statistical fluke is less than 1 part per billion. This is already so small a chance that anything less than that is not worth quantifying. Q: Do you mind telling me briefly how it happened when you became aware of the deviation from the standard model and previous measurements? Have you been pressing for a long time that your result will show an anomaly? Or was it necessary to wait to have analyzed all the data? The entire philosophy of this research is based on accuracy of the techniques and procedures used to make the very precise measurements that lead to the ultimate result. An extremely important aspect of our procedure is that nobody, not even us, know what is the actual value of the W boson mass during the entire analysis. After the data analysis is checked and rechecked and finally decided to be complete, only then the W boson mass value is revealed to us. This is achieved through an encryption algorithm. I have initiated and led the analyses to measure the W boson mass precisely in the CDF II experiment at Fermilab. Over the last 27 years, I have published five world-leading measurements of the W boson mass. This encryption technique, called "blind analysis" in particle physics, is what I have used. We are searching for the facts of nature. We do not know what the facts will be nor do we think about what they should be. It is like a treasure hunt. Our focus is entirely on searching as carefully as possible, regardless of the outcome. Q: What did you feel ? I was very pleasantly surprised. I was so focussed on the precision and robustness of the analysis that the value itself was more like a wonderful shock. Q: What was the reaction of the community around you? I understand there is excitement, but also a lot of caution… The community is impressed with the precision I have achieved. Not only is this new measurement much more precise than all other measurements, but it also demonstrates rigorous consistency checks. For example, I measure the Z boson mass in both electron and muon channels and find agreement with the previous precise measurement from the LEP collider at CERN. No other measurement of the W boson mass has performed this consistency check by measuring the Z boson mass as well. The Standard Model is known to be incomplete because it does not explain the dark matter in the universe, nor the excess of matter over antimatter. Our measurement is in direct contention with the Standard Model, which has been the most successful quantum theory of matter and forces to date. This measurement is the most significant deviation ever observed from a fundamental prediction of the Standard Model. As such, it is our biggest clue yet that we do not completely understand the weak nuclear force or all the particles that experience this force. This measurement points towards exciting new discoveries in particle physics for years to come. Understandably, particle physics has become very exciting after the publication of our paper. Q: What are you working on now? I am pursuing the hypothesis that dark matter consists of particles. According to certain extensions of the Standard Model, such particles could be produced at the LHC. Since their signature would be incredibly fleeting, it is a technological challenge to capture the traces of particles that disappear in a billionth of a second into dark matter. I am designing electronic circuits that could capture the fleeting images created by such processes. A description of this work is available here: https://physics.duke.edu/news/capturing-secrets-universe-silicon-chip Q: Among the hypotheses put forward by theoreticians that could explain the anomaly (supersymmetry, dark photon, etc.), which track seems the most promising to you? As an experimentalist, I am not the best judge of theoreticians' hypotheses. But I do find those hypotheses appealing that contain dark-sector particles. My reasoning is that we have discovered particles that experience three quantum forces (the quarks), two quantum forces (such as electrons and muons) and only one quantum force (neutrinos). Why not particles that are not affected by any of the known quantum forces? Such particles might explain the dark matter in the universe.