Homo Particles.......:eek:

[Xittenn]

The frequent topic of homosexualty on this board reminded me of a question I've asked myself many times. Is there a particle which repels its opposite and attracts its like?

 

----------assuming gravity doesn't have an anti(---assuming gravity is a particle---)--------------

Edited February 14, 2009 by buttacup

[Tom Mattson]

No, there are no known particles like that. However protons behave differently depending on the circumstances. At large distances the strong nuclear force doesn't bind particles together, so protons repel each other via their electric charges. However if two protons can be brought together close enough then they find there is a strong attraction between them. Also, neutrons aren't attracted to each other at large distances. But if you bring them in close together they are attracted to each other via the strong force.

 

They're not homo, but the proton appears to be bi-curious and the neutron is somewhat of a closet case.

[Xittenn]

So like all good nuclear families the males of the species have strong bonding ceremonies and the grandparents enjoy each others company on holidays................

[Sedit]

Im sure many have seen the sympathetic vibration experiment where a tuning fork is held near a ballon to rarify the air surrounding it and attract the ballon, Is there any case where this can reproduced on the quantum scale to attract and move neutral particals? The lack of air particals would mean that slightly differnt mechanism would be at work but the principle should stay the same.

Could this possibly provide insite into the strong nuclear forces?

[insane_alien]

well, what are you going to replace the air with?

 

vibrations like this can't travel without a medium and at the scales you are talking about there is no medium.

 

so the principle cannot be the same, nor can any of the mechanics.

[Sedit]

"scales you are talking about there is no medium."

Your right we havent detected any medium at this time. Also how could we detect a medium that would be so much smaller the the atoms we use for detectors.

 

Electrons could possibly behave as a medium on a scale such as this but any theory behind it would be pure speclutive and not worthy enough to really discuss.

Im in no way saying it is possible but what conditions would be needed for electrons to behave as the air does in that experiment?

I know it all sounds a bit screwy but Iv for some time tryed to think of a way to make a neutral partical accelerator and hit a brick wall at every turn.

Would a vibrating positive ion in an electron cloud of plasma rarify the electrons in the area?

[swansont]

You can do something similar with light and electric fields — the atoms will seek the low- or high-intensity part of the field, depending on the detuning (blue or red) of the light compared to the atomic resonance. It's called a dipole force trap.

[Xittenn]

So if we like trap some antimatter, an antiproton say, and get it to start enjoying the company of a proton instead of simply anhilating it we could essentially liken their behaviour to a certain social phenomenon?

Edited February 24, 2009 by buttacup

[Sedit]

Iv been looking into wake field accelerators swansont which seem simular to what your discribing but the overall information information on them just isnt there like most other forms of accelerators.

[Xittenn]

No go with the Penning trap? It covered so many bases, nature, nurture, dancing............that's just the mentionables!

 

But really, the idea behind this is the rebuting of the 'laws of attraction.' Is there absolutely no naturally occuring instances of rogue pairing.....................leaving the definition of rogue pairing to the imaginations of the respective posters! If 'straight love' is so deeply ingrained so much so that it is of 'fundamental nature' and follows the 'laws of attraction' is there no respective counterpart for homosexuality(which has been proven to exist.) The proton answer was without a doubt an answer but I would in no way call this a violation of the afore mentioned laws........... There are what 120 something sub-atomic particles(I know sketchy statement I may edit.)

 

But hey if there really isn't well it's all good!

Edited February 25, 2009 by buttacup