Are neutrons the cause of the weak force?

[MarkE]

15 minutes ago, Strange said:

p.s. "Wikipedia" is not a useful reference. You might as well say "a book" or "someone said".

So in this case it's not true then?

15 minutes ago, Strange said:

p.p.s The particles "responsible" for the weak interaction are the W and Z bosons.

Coming from where?

[Strange]

2 minutes ago, MarkE said:

So in this case it's not true then?

It seems to be true. I just mean that something as vague as "an encyclopaedia" is not a useful reference; i.e.it doesn't;t really help anyone find the information. A link to (or even just the name of) the specific article would be better.

4 minutes ago, MarkE said:

Coming from where?

I don't know what that means.

What is the basis for your hypothesis?

[swansont]

1 minute ago, MarkE said:

Coming from where?

They pop into and out of existence as they are exchanged between particles. (Bosons do not follow a number conservation law. They can be created and destroyed)

[Strange]

The W & Z are bosons and the "force carriers" for the weak interaction.The way they take part in the interactions is describer on the page I linked to: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weak_interaction#Interaction_types 

Edited August 24, 2017 by Strange

[Sensei]

1 hour ago, MarkE said:

"Beta-plus decay can only happen inside nuclei when the absolute value of the binding energy of the daughter nucleus is greater than that of the parent nucleus, i.e., the daughter nucleus is a lower-energy state" (Wikipedia). I don't really understand what this means, do you?

Check my signature, and learn from it how to calculate decay energy of some unstable isotope or particle.

Particle that has more mass-energy can spontaneously decay to other particle with smaller mass-energy. But not reverse.

To induce reverse process, there is needed supply of additional mass-energy from external source.

f.e. to split Deuterium atom you need to supply 2.22 MeV energy (mass-energy of Deuterium nucleus is m_d=m_p+m_n-2.22 MeV/c^2 = 938.272 MeV/c^2 + 939.565 MeV/c^2 - 2.22 MeV/c^2 (mass-energy of free proton plus mass-energy of free neutron))

 

Edited August 24, 2017 by Sensei

[Phi for All]

6 hours ago, MarkE said:

I'm curious because I hypothesize that the down quark is not 'responsible' for the same forces as the up quark is.

!

Moderator Note

This is a mainstream section, and so far your questions have been appropriate, but I wanted to caution you about mixing speculation into your mainstream thread. If you have an idea you want to assert that isn't mainstream science, it needs to be contained fully in the Speculations section. Too many students come here for answers their teachers will give them good grades for.

You can keep this thread pure and it will stay put. You can mix in some conjecture that will be split off to a Speculations thread of its own. You can also keep this thread pure AND start a new thread with your hypothesis, doing your best to support it per the rules of that section. You don't need to answer this note, but I wanted you to know your options.

 

[MarkE]

@Phi for All Thank for pointing that out. I wouldn't have mentioned my hypothesis if nobody had asked me about it, but someone was curious, so that's why I shared it.

Still, the W-, W+ and Z boson derive from within an atom. Because the weak interaction is a short range force it occurs at the quark level. Because there are only two types of quark (well, six if you take the 2nd and 3rd generation into account), it seems rather unlikely that its source can be either the up AND the down quark at the same time, so therefore I was wondering if anybody could tell me whether it's more plausible that it's the heavier down quark, instead of the up quark. 

Edited August 26, 2017 by MarkE

[Strange]

1 minute ago, MarkE said:

Still, the W and Z bosons derive from within an atom. Because the weak interaction is a short range force it occurs at the quark level. Because there are only two types of quark (well, six if you take the 2nd and 3rd generation into account), it seems rather unlikely that its source can be either the up AND the down quark at the same time, so therefore I was wondering if anybody could tell me whether it's more plausible that it's the heavier down quark, instead of the up quark. 

This has been answered multiple times. You are not going to get a different answer just by asking the same question.

The weak interaction can go either way depending on whether it is energetically favourable or not.

If there are specific details of the mechanism (as described on the various Wikipedia pages that have been referenced, and the sources listed there) that you don't understand then feel free to ask questions about those.

 

"Still, the W and Z bosons derive from within an atom"  This is nonsense.

[MarkE]

8 minutes ago, Strange said:

"Still, the W and Z bosons derive from within an atom"  This is nonsense.

Not 'derive from' then, but 'take place inside' an atom (since it's a subatomic force). Sorry for not using the correct verb there

[Strange]

7 minutes ago, MarkE said:

Not 'derive from' then, but 'take place inside' an atom (since it's a subatomic force). Sorry for not using the correct verb there

It can take place inside an atom. It can also take place outside an atom.

How on Earth can you have a "hypothesis" when you don't even understand the most basic physics? That is not a hypothesis it is wild guess. 

[MarkE]

2 minutes ago, Strange said:

It can take place inside an atom. It can also take place outside an atom.

Do you mean that the term 'nuclear force' is not right?

[Strange]

5 minutes ago, MarkE said:

Do you mean that the term 'nuclear force' is not right?

"a strong attractive force between nucleons in the atomic nucleus that holds the nucleus together."

Sounds right to me. But this is caused by the (residual) strong force between the nucleons. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_force

"This article is about the force that holds nucleons together in a nucleus. ... Not to be confused with weak nuclear force."

"The weak force plays no role in the interaction of nucleons ..."

[MarkE]

In particle physics, the weak interaction (the weak force or weak nuclear force) is the mechanism of interaction between sub-atomic particles that causes radioactive decay. -> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weak_interaction

"The interaction between sub-atomic particles". If I understand you correctly, this does NOT mean that it's taking place inside an atom? And if you are referring to radiation, yes, that's happening outside the atom, but that doesn't mean that the source for this radiation is not coming from inside the atom.

[Strange]

Sub-atomic means (informally) "smaller than an atom" 

"Atom" means indivisible, so when it was found that they were composed of other particles, these were called sub-atomic particles. We then found out that there are an even larger number of particles that do not occur in atoms. 

Baryons and mesons have already been mentioned. All mesons decay because of the weak interaction. But they do not occur in atoms.

Free neutrons (outside of atoms) decay through the weak interaction.

[MarkE]

OK, thanks for pointing that out. 

So 'nuclear force' means 'interaction between nucleons'. What then is the correct scientific term for 'interaction between sub-atomic particles'?

Edited August 26, 2017 by MarkE

[Strange]

30 minutes ago, MarkE said:

OK, thanks for pointing that out. 

So 'nuclear force' means 'interaction between nucleons'. What then is the correct scientific term for 'interaction between sub-atomic particles'?

It depends on the interaction. It could be the strong nuclear force, the weak nuclear force or electromagnetism. Or even gravity, I suppose.

Are you reconsidering the idea that you might have a "hypothesis" yet?

[MarkE]

The term for interactions between sub-atomic particles regarding the weak nuclear force

[Strange]

11 minutes ago, MarkE said:

The term for interactions between sub-atomic particles regarding the weak nuclear force

The weak interaction.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weak_interaction

It is how we detect neutrinos, for example.

[swansont]

2 hours ago, MarkE said:

@Phi for All Thank for pointing that out. I wouldn't have mentioned my hypothesis if nobody had asked me about it, but someone was curious, so that's why I shared it.

Still, the W-, W+ and Z boson derive from within an atom. Because the weak interaction is a short range force it occurs at the quark level. Because there are only two types of quark (well, six if you take the 2nd and 3rd generation into account), it seems rather unlikely that its source can be either the up AND the down quark at the same time, so therefore I was wondering if anybody could tell me whether it's more plausible that it's the heavier down quark, instead of the up quark. 

Since there are mesons and baryons that have neither quark, this can't be the case.

[MarkE]

31 minutes ago, swansont said:

Since there are mesons and baryons that have neither quark, this can't be the case.

Could you please explain to me what you mean by that?

[Sensei]

4 hours ago, MarkE said:

Could you please explain to me what you mean by that?

He meant that there are mesons and baryons that contain no up-quark and no down-quark.

Just quarks and anti-quarks from 2nd and 3rd generation of quarks (up/down are 1st generation of quarks).

Example phi meson

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phi_meson

 

Leptons from 2nd generation are decaying leptonic pathway exclusively.

Leptons from 3rd generation are decaying either leptonic, semi-leptonic and baryonic pathways.

And they have no any quarks or anti-quarks (in Standard Model classification of subatomic particles).

Example muon

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muon

Edited August 26, 2017 by Sensei

[swansont]

5 hours ago, MarkE said:

Could you please explain to me what you mean by that?

I provided links several days ago. I take it you did not check out the lists of baryons and mesons. They show the quarks that comprise them.

[MarkE]

Summarizing our discussion so far:

On 26/08/2017 at 0:05 PM, Strange said:

"Still, the W and Z bosons derive from within an atom"  This is nonsense.

 

On 26/08/2017 at 2:08 PM, swansont said:

Since there are mesons and baryons that have neither quark, this can't be the case.

 

On 26/08/2017 at 2:43 PM, MarkE said:

Could you please explain to me what you mean by that?

 

On 26/08/2017 at 7:05 PM, Sensei said:

He meant that there are mesons and baryons that contain no up-quark and no down-quark.

If I understand this correctly, the weak interaction also occurs in mesons, and because their 2nd and 3rd generation family members don't consist of any quarks we can therefore conclude with certainty that the source for the force carriers of the weak force (W-, W+ and Z bosons) can't possibly come from within a quark.

If this is the case, than what are our remained options? The weak nuclear force is a force between sub-atomic particles, so it has to originate from somewhere inside an atom, right?

[Strange]

23 minutes ago, MarkE said:

If I understand this correctly, the weak interaction also occurs in mesons, and because their 2nd and 3rd generation family members don't consist of any quarks

All mesons and baryons consist of quarks. 

[MarkE]

4 minutes ago, Strange said:

All mesons and baryons consist of quarks. 

That's not what swansont said:

On 26/08/2017 at 2:08 PM, swansont said:

Since there are mesons and baryons that have neither quark, this can't be the case.