Atomic Separation: Is It Possible?

  • Thread starter Thread starter cam875
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Atoms
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the feasibility of separating atoms into their subatomic particles, specifically electrons and quarks, with the consensus that while atoms can be split into protons and neutrons, the latter cannot be divided into quarks. Quarks were discovered through experiments like Deep Inelastic Scattering, which demonstrated their existence despite the inability to isolate them. The conversation highlights the importance of conserved quantities in physics, such as charge and lepton number, which guide theoretical predictions and experimental observations. These principles help scientists infer the existence of particles like quarks when discrepancies arise in expected outcomes. Overall, the dialogue emphasizes the complexity of atomic structure and the theoretical underpinnings that lead to our understanding of fundamental particles.
cam875
Messages
227
Reaction score
0
is it possible to separate an atom into its smaller subatomic particles like electrons and the quarks that make up protons and neutrons and keep those particles contained or do they always have to form an atom.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It is possible to split up atoms in electrons, neutrons and protons - well, in pieces of the nucleus. It is not possible to split up neutrons and protons into quarks.
 
than how did they discover that quarks exist
 
cam875 said:
than how did they discover that quarks exist

Edit: {

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

Apparently they used Deep inelastic scattering to prove that they exist. But the mathematics had shown them to be useful. I guess you can ignore everything I originally wrote now...

}

Well, as far as my limited understanding goes (Someone PLEASE correct me if I'm wrong) there are certain quantities in physics which are conserved. Good examples are energy, linear momentum, etc. Some of these quantities are quantised, such as electrical charge (which always comes in units of the charge on the electron), baryon number, lepton number, spin etc. The fact that these are conserved is just experimental observation.

In a given process, these conserved quantities make calculations easier. For example, in beta decay, a neutron decays into a proton (or an up quark changes to a down) an electron, an (electron) antineutrino and photon(s)... So, a neutron has zero charge, so the sum of the charges of its product must also have zero charge. Now let's say that we didn't know that electrons exist. We observe the stuff we had to begin with (a neutron) and we observe what we know about, namely the proton, the antineutrino and the photon(s). We note that we've gained charge and lepton number from somewhere. This is a pain. Our theory predicts that charge is conserved. Either there's a lepton produced with negative charge that we don't know about (the electron) or the theory is wrong. In every other experiment, we've found that charge and lepton number are conserved, so the theory looks good. This leads people to search for the particle with the given properties. In a similar way, the theory predicts certain particles contained within baryons, which have certain qualities. These are the quarks. It's all a lot clearer with a diagram;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Standard_Model_of_Elementary_Particles.svg

We've whittled the particles down to 16 fundamental or elementary particles of which everything else is made. Which is nice. And good. And simple. The quarks are predicted by theory essentially. And by counting numbers we know that they're there.
 
I think it's easist first to watch a short vidio clip I find these videos very relaxing to watch .. I got to thinking is this being done in the most efficient way? The sand has to be suspended in the water to move it to the outlet ... The faster the water , the more turbulance and the sand stays suspended, so it seems to me the rule of thumb is the hose be aimed towards the outlet at all times .. Many times the workers hit the sand directly which will greatly reduce the water...

Similar threads

Back
Top