What if there's something that makes up quarks?

[tezk_4]

TL;DR

Preon I guess or maybe not

Up quark has mass of 2.2 MeV and 2/3 charge, if we divide 2.2÷2 then we get 1.1 MeV. What if the 1 MeV is something thats responsible for positive charge and 0.1 MeV is something that confine the thing that's responsible for positive charge. If this were true then the reason the harder u push the up quark the harder it gets because u push the thing that's responsible for positive charge to the thing that confine it. If we extend this, maybe the thing that confine is responsible for gravity too so like the thing is abundant and push other thing that has less mass to more mass like space bend pressure or something

 

[PeroK]

The quark model was developed to explain the range of particles that emerged from scattering experiments. It was no more and no less than was needed. The quark model has a well-defined basis.

You can ask "what if" about anything. You need a well-defined basis which explains as yet unexplained phenomena.

Physics isn't just a question of suggesting "maybe this" or "maybe that".

 

[physika]

TL;DR: Preon Model

Yes, but it suffers from the confinement paradox: to keep three preons bound together within a space as incredibly small as that of an electron, the required attractive force would have to be so gigantic that, according to Einstein’s equation E=mc^2, the electron would have to weigh millions of times more than it actually does.

 

[renormalize]

Yes, but it suffers from the confinement paradox: to keep three preons bound together within a space as incredibly small as that of an electron, the required attractive force would have to be so gigantic that, according to Einstein’s equation E=mc^2, the electron would have to weigh millions of times more than it actually does.

Not quite. Per the uncertainty principle, confinement within incredibly small volumes imparts tremendous kinetic energy to the preons, requiring immense binding energy to hold them together. But since binding energy is negative, it can (at least in principle) be arranged to almost perfectly cancel the positive kinetic energy, leaving only the residual observed small mass-energy of the electron or quark. But this in turn requires an implausible degree of "fine tuning", as pointed out by Vanadium 50 in an old thread: https://www.physicsforums.com/threa...in-particle-physics-often-overlooked.1006316/

(3) Think about how this must work quantum mechanically. As said above, electrons are very small - length scale of TeV. (If lengths in TeV are confusing, you can convert to meters using the factor 200 MeV fm = 1). That means that their constituents need to be highly localized - i.e. have a small Compton wavelength, and thus be heavy. That means they need to be bound deeply in order for the composite to have a low mass. How deeply? If an electron is made up of two 10 TeV preons, they are bound by 199999999488998 eV. Every digit there is significant - this is called "fine tuning", Two quantities that have nothing to do with each other - the preon mass and the strength of its binding force -need to be the same to many decimal places.

 

[tezk_4]

Yes, but it suffers from the confinement paradox: to keep three preons bound together within a space as incredibly small as that of an electron, the required attractive force would have to be so gigantic that, according to Einstein’s equation E=mc^2, the electron would have to weigh millions of times more than it actually does.

In this model it needs 0.1 MeV of "cage" to confine the inner so to confine 2 inner parts that responsible for charge it needs 0.2 MeV so it's cheap, up quark cage confine 2 inner parts because in this model, charge mean how much inner part in is the cage, in this model up quark doesn't have 3 "preons" but 2.And about electron, - charge mean it has no inner part like emptiness so maybe the reason electron mass is non zero because our instrument counts the cage rather than the inner because u can't detect the inner, the inner has no mass

 

[tezk_4]

You need a well-defined basis which explains as yet unexplained phenomena.

Physics isn't just a question of suggesting "maybe this" or "maybe that".

To add, maybe photon pass through the empty inner thus particle that's negative-charge-only isn't visible so dark matter isn't visible but still have mass because it's cage with inner that's negative thing without other positive thing that construct it

 

[berkeman]

Thread is closed for Moderation.

 

[berkeman]

Since this thread is based on the OP's speculations, it will remain closed.