Does string theory and the composition of quarks explain dark matter.

alpha7158
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Hello everyone. I'm not a physicist however have been doing some research on the concepts behind dark energy and string theory and it has presented me with a question:

Is it possible that dark matter could be the components of quarks that haven't pulled together to form the quarks. We can't measure what quarks are made of just yet so could it be feasible that this matter is a mast of unmeasurable quark component dust.

I relate this to string theory as it suggests that quarks are made up of energy strings. Please correct me if I have used any incorrect assumptions.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
No, quarks are fundamental according to most mainstream theories.
 
Yes!

Supersymmetry predicts the existence of twice as many particles as there currently are in the standard model. These particles are called superpartners. The super partner of neutral bosons, called the neutralino, is the leading candidate for dark matter.

Is it possible that dark matter could be the components of quarks that haven't pulled together to form the quarks.

I love how you conceptualized this. The super partners cancel the quadratic mass renormalization of the particles they're the partners of. Or as you put it, they are "pulled together". I have an intuitive idea of what quadratic mass renormalization is, but I couldn't explain it, maybe some else can.

Anyway check these articles:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supersymmetry
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hierarchy_problem
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_particles
 
I seem to notice a buildup of papers like this: Detecting single gravitons with quantum sensing. (OK, old one.) Toward graviton detection via photon-graviton quantum state conversion Is this akin to “we’re soon gonna put string theory to the test”, or are these legit? Mind, I’m not expecting anyone to read the papers and explain them to me, but if one of you educated people already have an opinion I’d like to hear it. If not please ignore me. EDIT: I strongly suspect it’s bunk but...
I'm trying to understand the relationship between the Higgs mechanism and the concept of inertia. The Higgs field gives fundamental particles their rest mass, but it doesn't seem to directly explain why a massive object resists acceleration (inertia). My question is: How does the Standard Model account for inertia? Is it simply taken as a given property of mass, or is there a deeper connection to the vacuum structure? Furthermore, how does the Higgs mechanism relate to broader concepts like...
Back
Top