Mordred

Read that Hobbs paper again. It literally means there is no corpuscular (solid) property to a particle. The paper deals directly with the particle/wave duality. I forgot to add the De-Broglie wavelength which applies to massive particles.

Solid is the ultimate illusion sorry to tell you that

Take a waveform. A long sinusiodal wave has no determinant length. A spike or excitation restores to ground state in a finite region. Thats your pointlike Compton wavelength where the pointlike property becomes meaningless beyond.

A string is akin to a wavefunction harmonic.

size isn't a particle property

Are you referring to the Anderson impurity model? Asking as this is one I'm not familiar with. Much easier to read in the above.

"Any `kinetic’ energy associated with S2 is absorbed into the rest mass" Here follow this link. https://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://web.pa.msu.edu/people/mmoore/Lect33_Spin.pdf&ved=0ahUKEwjdxJ739u7XAhVL0WMKHQdFBs4QFggmMAQ&usg=AOvVaw35nMvESx5WrXA4d7a7VB2- I think maybe the confusion here maybe nuclear spin [math]\mathbb{I}[/math] which is different than intrinsic spin of the electron. Don't confuse the two nor isospin for the strong force.

It takes a bit of effort to get used to the latex structure here. We have a testing area to get used to it http://www.scienceforums.net/forum/99-the-sandbox/ If you want write up the latex string under Office or whatever format your used to and I will give you a hand with it.

Sounds good I was about to recommend some pre study. The easiest way to grasp it is to look at how the hydrogen atom is modelled prior to more complex atoms

That would be a good idea to cover in greater detail.

The pointlike characteristic is often poorly understood the term particle is a misnomer itself that we are stuck with for historical reasons. So one must switch their understanding of what is defined as a particle. This is something I wanted to make sure you are aware of as it is and immense help in understanding the creation annihilation operators via constructive destructive interference patterns. This will also apply to the nucleus. With that understanding look again at your principle quantum numbers and their corresponding wavefunctions

We are dealing with field excitations. Ie confined wavefunctions its pointlike not point as per a corpuscular bullet. Here read this in regards to the pointlike nature https://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://arxiv.org/pdf/1204.4616&ved=0ahUKEwikmoC22e7XAhUG0WMKHWtKBkAQFggdMAA&usg=AOvVaw0yvDJRWMF0aCmF5wnTNnEn

I don't see any trap he asked a valid question. Particles are not spinning balls the angular momentum term is an aspect of how to model the linear and angular vector symmetry relations under rotations. The point like characteristic is defined by the Compton wavelength

I'm really not sure how to respond to that. Other than ignore the insult. Prove both myself and Swansont wrong. It should be a trivial matter if your correct

Glad to help, remember charge types are electromagnetic, flavor and color for the weak and strong in that order

Flavor charge not electromagnetic charge

WIMP is simply weakly interactive massive particles. All neutrinos fall into this category

True Ok we are on the same school of thought and I can see the direction your going. The main connection is how the Higgs interacts with the neutrino family via the seesaw mechanism during the symmetry breaking stages. MSSM obviously adding additional seesaw mechanisms for each Higg's/Higglets.

Sterile neutrinos is a member of the WIMP family

Hot warm and cold DM have significant diifferences in their momentum terms. Hot DM would have the Relativistic equation of state. So would behave as radiation. Are you referring to the fact we have yet to observe or find any right hand neutrinos predicted by our model ? If so then I agree that this is one of the DM candidates. A lot of research is being done in this direction

Nothing wrong with your valid opening question. It is a good question to ask. Though it isn't a force but rather an unknown form of matter

correct

No this will require peer review support to be in the mainstream physics section. Back this up with a peer review paper or I recommend it gets moved to its own thread under Speculation as a personal model development. First off quark antiquarks are not the generations. Secondly there is no supportive evidence that the three types of hypothesized DM particles are seperate generation particles. Nor can DM be comprised of quark combinations as that will allow interactions with all 4 forces. All known mesons, leptons, Diquarks tetraquarks pentaquarks do so. As all quarks do so. This encompasses the baryonic familiy. DM is non baryonic. Further more quarks belong to the boson family and DM matches fermionic characteristics the generations of the quark family is due to stages of symmetry breaking as the guage bosons. This process does not apply to the fermionic family. If you like I will supply the related formulas. LCDM strongly supports the cold dark matter as the main candidate from the other two previously hypothesized variants. Provide supportive peer review studies for the DM generations claim you have made. Note Supersymmetric particles also do not change the above, so don't waste your time digging there for support. Nor look under Higg's seesaw under the types 1 to 4 seesaw mechanisms under metastability under MSM nor MSSM

Lol well if you tried publishing the math in that clunky format it won't go anywhere. Might be my best recommendation I can possibly give. Fix that math above as it is incredibly ugly. As is it its barely legible. You told me before you know how to latex. Start there then look at how to reduce and better organize that expression. As it is I am certainly not going to waste any effort trying to decipher it. PS make sure it passes Dimensional analysis. Both Dubbelosix and I both mentioned this critically important detail. You will also require the mathematical proofs to your equation.

Flavor being the workforce interactions which provides the connection to the Higgs seesaw mechanism