- #1
zinq
- 399
- 119
Everything in the universe that has a beginning seems to also have an end. Stars, galaxies, molecules, atoms. But what about elementary particles? In case of heat death would it become a uniform quark soup?
zinq said:In case of heat death would it become a uniform quark soup?
Eventually proton decay should get rid of stable nuclei.mathman said:Why should stable nuclei decay at all?
Is that a given?Chalnoth said:Eventually proton decay should get rid of stable nuclei.
Most likely, yes. Proton decay is virtually guaranteed by simple symmetry arguments: some process created the protons, and the time reverse of that process would necessarily cause them to decay (note: it wouldn't quite be that simple, but that's the basic idea). The properties of that process may suppress it to an extremely low level (e.g. requiring a very massive intermediate particle, akin to how the masses of the weak force bosons suppresses the weak nuclear force), but simple arguments seem to indicate it's impossible to eliminate it entirely.256bits said:Is that a given?
I thought some experiments suggested the proton decay was virtually non-existent.
Comeback City said:is it not possible at all that certain "stable" nuclei have half-lives that are simply too long for us to determine?
Chalnoth said:Most likely, yes. Proton decay is virtually guaranteed by simple symmetry arguments: some process created the protons, and the time reverse of that process would necessarily cause them to decay (note: it wouldn't quite be that simple, but that's the basic idea). The properties of that process may suppress it to an extremely low level (e.g. requiring a very massive intermediate particle, akin to how the masses of the weak force bosons suppresses the weak nuclear force), but simple arguments seem to indicate it's impossible to eliminate it entirely.
They exist, and aren't balanced by anything in our universe with a negative baryon number. Look up baryogenesis if you want to see some of the current science surrounding this topic.snorkack said:What arguments are used to claim that any process ever created protons?
The difference is that proton decay is a microscopic reaction, while black holes and a "big crunch" are macroscopic.snorkack said:Simple symmetry arguments would suggest that time reversal of big bang would be big crunch, yet big crunch seems not to be expected now. Time reversal of a black hole is a white hole, yet white holes are also not expected.
Chronos said:The question of proton decay remains an open question in particle physics. One of the fundamental rules in particle physics is the total number of quarks minus the total number of antiquarks must not change in a decay.
Elementary particles are the smallest known building blocks of matter. They are subatomic particles that cannot be broken down into smaller particles through any known physical process.
Quarks are fundamental particles that make up protons and neutrons, which are the building blocks of atomic nuclei. They are also believed to be the building blocks of other particles, such as mesons and baryons.
No, not all elementary particles decay into quarks. Some particles, such as photons, do not have a substructure and therefore cannot decay into smaller particles.
Some elementary particles decay into quarks because they are unstable and have excess energy. This excess energy is released in the form of other particles, such as quarks, during the decay process.
Yes, the decay of elementary particles into quarks can be observed through experiments conducted in particle accelerators, such as the Large Hadron Collider. By studying the particles produced in these collisions, scientists can gather information about the properties and behaviors of elementary particles.