basic building blocks

[derek w]

Providing you have up/down and anti-up/down quarks,all other particles will be created as side effect.

[ajb]

What about the electron?

[derek w]

What about the electron?

High energy radiation,creates electron/positron pairs via photon+photon collisions.

[ajb]

So, you are not suggesting that all "stuff" is made just of quarks and anti-quarks?

[derek w]

So, you are not suggesting that all "stuff" is made just of quarks and anti-quarks?

No.Free quarks in a quark gluon soup,would have greater energy than quarks confined in protons,they would have to release high energy radiation to become confined.That high energy radiation then creating electron/positron pairs.

[mathematic]

Once quarks combine you end up with neutrons and protons. The neutron decay leads to protons and electrons. Question - in this model how did the universe become electrically neutral?

[swansont]

Providing you have up/down and anti-up/down quarks,all other particles will be created as side effect.

 

What about matter/antimatter asymmetry?

 

Why u/d, if you're creating everything else out of the energy of the system?

[derek w]

If 2 up and 1 down quark are confined,then the electron must be the opposite effect?

[beefpatty]

The electron is fundamental, i.e. it is not made of quarks.

[derek w]

The electron is fundamental, i.e. it is not made of quarks.

If digging a hole creates a pile of dirt,that does not infer that a pile of dirt is made of holes.

I am not inferring that electrons are made of quarks.

[beefpatty]

Sorry, by "opposite effect" I thought you meant 2 down and 1 up quark.

[Przemyslaw.Gruchala]

I am not inferring that electrons are made of quarks.

 

Then you should have no problem explaining how proton is converted to neutron and positron in beta decay+.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beta_decay

 

And how proton that received electron is also converted to neutron in electron capture.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electron_capture

Edited February 17, 2013 by Przemyslaw.Gruchala

[derek w]

Then you should have no problem explaining how proton is converted to neutron and positron in beta decay+.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beta_decay

 

And how proton that received electron is also converted to neutron in electron capture.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electron_capture

I don't see that this disproves my original statement "that provided you have up/down and anti-up/down quarks all other particles will be created as side effects.

[ajb]

I don't see that this disproves my original statement "that provided you have up/down and anti-up/down quarks all other particles will be created as side effects.

It is a very loose statement and I am not sure where you want to take it.

[derek w]

quote:-

Earlier RHIC results suggested that when gold nuclei collide head-on their kinetic energy dissociates many nucleons and forms the hot,dense plasma of quarks and gluons,which must immediately begin to expand and cool.The hot plasma lasts only 10^-23 seconds,and only when the plasma cools sufficiently do the quarks and gluons "freeze out",leaving a spray of thousands of elementary particles carrying the signature of the hot,dense plasma that led to their production.

(end quote.)

 

Question, what is meant by "signature of the hot,dense plasma that led to their production"?

[swansont]

The particles you produce are dependent on the energy and charge available that created the plasma.

[derek w]

Then you should have no problem explaining how proton is converted to neutron and positron in beta decay+.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beta_decay

 

And how proton that received electron is also converted to neutron in electron capture.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electron_capture

The interesting thing from these articles,is does the rate of decay go up if the background level of neutrino's is higher,e.g.closer to the sun?

 

Thanks Swansont for your reply.

Edited February 19, 2013 by derek w

[derek w]

Question is the weak force an accumulative force?

[SamBridge]

If you just study particle physics more you will fine many physicists wanted some simple way to create a universal set of particles to describe all other particles and failed, so far there's no proof. The closest thing is string theory and it has no direct observable evidence.

[Przemyslaw.Gruchala]

If you just study particle physics more you will fine many physicists wanted some simple way to create a universal set of particles to describe all other particles and failed, so far there's no proof.

 

Their work was immediately placed to speculations..

 

The closest thing is string theory and it has no direct observable evidence.

 

You must be kidding..

[derek w]

My understanding is that particles are thought of as wave packets,and that interaction changes the wave packets.

[Przemyslaw.Gruchala]

My understanding is that particles are thought of as wave packets,and that interaction changes the wave packets.

 

There are needed at least positive wave and negative wave.

If they overlap, we detect neutral object.

 

Otherwise charge must be hidden variable. Property of particle. But such model doesn't explain how two gamma photons are producing electron and positron. Property is automagically split.. It's like splitting 1 cent in finances...

Edited February 21, 2013 by Przemyslaw.Gruchala

[derek w]

There are needed at least positive wave and negative wave.

If they overlap, we detect neutral object.

 

Otherwise charge must be hidden variable. Property of particle. But such model doesn't explain how two gamma photons are producing electron and positron. Property is automagically split.. It's like splitting 1 cent in finances...

In a 4-dimensional space,any point in 3-dimensional space can be described as oscillating in the 4th dimension.

backward time wave packets,forward time wave packets,or 50% forward 50% backward,or 60% forward 40% backward etc.

[Przemyslaw.Gruchala]

backward time wave packets,forward time wave packets,or 50% forward 50% backward,or 60% forward 40% backward etc.

 

 

So you're suggesting right now that positron is electron that travels back in time?

 

And antiproton is proton that travels back in time?

 

And pion+ is pion-, muon+ is muon-, tau+ is tau- etc that all travels back in time than their opposite electric charge equivalents.. ?

[swansont]

So you're suggesting right now that positron is electron that travels back in time?

 

And antiproton is proton that travels back in time?

 

And pion+ is pion-, muon+ is muon-, tau+ is tau- etc that all travels back in time than their opposite electric charge equivalents.. ?

 

That's what you get of you apply time reversal to the particle, with CPT as a good symmetry.