Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Fundamental particle structure table

  1. Jun 13, 2004 #1
    On http://elasticity2.tripod.com/ I have replaced all previous work with a table showing tha structural relationship between fundamental particles. (Muon and Tau will be included when I have changed the scale of current work tables).
    I show that there are only three fundamental particles, each of which has one of four possible field states depending on two basic possibilities either the particle is balance internally (fractionally charged) or externally (whole number charge) and within each balance state the particle has either the maximum (+charge) or minimum (- charge) charge.
    Anti-particles are not shown, but their existence is of course permitted.
    The cause of this particle structure will be dealt with seperately on Theory Developement and will be similar to my vacuum theory proposals. Meanwhile I have written the table in Standard Model terms which I hope will attract some comment from Standard Model supporters.
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Jun 13, 2004 #2

    arivero

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    The thing you are doing in that presentation is to consider if the (usually called) "horizontal symmetry" is more fundamental than U(1)xSU(2)xSU(3).

    Now, to "proof" that the horizontal symmetry gives place to multiplets, you have done very fine adjustments in quark masses. I think it should be more honest if you quote also the experimental uncertainty in each mass determination. IE please put a line for "experimental value" and other line for "elasticity2 theoretically preferred value" of masses.
     
  4. Jun 13, 2004 #3
    Good work... if you would like I could post it on my site so it doesn't have to be hosted off Tripod

    pm if you are interested.
     
  5. Jun 14, 2004 #4
    arivero

    Now, to "proof" that the horizontal symmetry gives place to multiplets, you have done very fine adjustments in quark masses. I think it should be more honest if you quote also the experimental uncertainty in each mass

    This is where my ignorance and total lack of education becomes publicly obvious. I have to admit that while I have some idea of what you expect me to do, I have no idea how to do it!. But I will endeavour to find out.

    I finished school in 1944 at the age of 14. So I have to ask you to make allowances for the tremendous difference between the educational standards of wartime Brittain and those of today.
     
  6. Jun 14, 2004 #5

    chroot

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    This is also theory development worthy, elas.

    - Warren
     
  7. Jun 14, 2004 #6
    Elas, you don't need disclaimers on your education. An honest search for the Truth is the only requirement.

    Have you a copy of "Physical Review D Particles and Fields" 2004" This is free from Lawrence Labs in Berkeley and shows all the experimental results etc in elementary particle physics for the past two years.. Infromation rich. This might help. The volume approx. 1000 pages. This paper will answer the 'experimental uncerainty' question posed.
     
  8. Jun 14, 2004 #7
    geistkiesel

    Have you a copy of "Physical Review D Particles and Fields" 2004" This is free from Lawrence Labs in Berkeley

    Lawrence Labs page took me back to Particle Data Group and that is where I got the quark mass figures for my table.
    Although delighted with the replies to date I am somewhat confused in that the comments seem to concentrate on mass, symmetry and multiplets whereas I thought the originality of my table lay in the fact that it relates mass to force and charge. On my previous web page (using an earlier incorrect table) I tried to show the relationship between mass and force and how the two vary in order to determine the charge.
    arivero seems to think that I determined my own mass numbers, but , of course I did not having always believed these to be found by experiment.

    I intend to finish the existing table. Then I want to try and include zero charged particles that have mass, (I already have an idea I want to check out). Finally I intend to re-write my vacuum theory explanation of what causes particles to have their particular properties. This will be placed on theory delelopement as reccommended by chroot.
    If anyone feels I should do things in a different order or manner please let me know. Likewise if I have missunderstood any of your comments.

    Finally I could do with a little help on
    is more fundamental than U(1)xSU(2)xSU(3).
    where will I find an explanation?
     
  9. Jun 15, 2004 #8

    arivero

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    U(1)xSU(2)xSU(3) is the symmetry group of the force fields. U(1)xSU(2) being the electroweak force, SU(3) being color force. Roughly (there is a symmetry breaking around), they give you the labels for electric charge, "up/down charge", and color charge.

    To justify the existence of three generations, some researchers have essayed a "horizontal symmetry", which should give us the labels for "generation charge".

    IE, "horizontal" is really the technical term to refer to the almost equality of your boldfaced numbers in each horizontal line.

    I am not opossed to getting some masses from theoretical calculus. I only was pointing out that your page does not show clearly the experimental data (from PDG or from the Handbook) for comparision.

    Also, I should underline, or mark with italics, the numbers you put in as input, to distinguish them from the ones you get from calculation. For instance even if you get the next radious by multiplication, at least one of them is input by hand, isn't it? I would underline it.
     
  10. Jun 15, 2004 #9
    arivero

    Thanks for information.
    Part deals in the sort of mathematics I have never studied, but at least now I know which terms I have to get to grips with.

    To justify the existence of three generations, some researchers have essayed a "horizontal symmetry", which should give us the labels for "generation charge".
    In this sentence does "horizontal symmetry" mean the same as my statement "the particles on each horizontal layer are in reality different states of the same particle" and do they conclude that these charge states arise from the need for internal/external balance?

    almost equality of your boldfaced numbers in each horizontal line.
    My numbers are unequal because of the limitations of the computer programme and the difficulties encountered in trying to change scales; if the maths were done to a greater degree of accuracy the numbers would be equal (pos. to pos. and neg. to neg.).
    I will adopt your recommendations regarding lay out when I complete the table although I should note that the radii are found by the 'half-wave' reduction process I used in earlier articles; the constants arise from this process.

    On reflection, I suppose that what is important to me is to know how much of my work, if any; is truly original, as there is little point in repeating the work of professionals in an amateur manner. What I thought to be genuinely original was the use of vacuum force as the cause of the actions that give rise to the particles in their particular form or states.
     
  11. Jun 15, 2004 #10

    arivero

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    The numerical part of your work (mass predictions???) is original and in fact is the one that I can not understand. The concept of horizontal symmetry, meaning the same that your quoted statement, is not so new, nor the concept of exact and approximate symmetries relating to mass values. Note that for instance also the three particles "up red" "up green" "up blue" can be seen either as a SU(3) triplet of particles having a given mass or as a three separate state vectors in Hilbert Space having, all the three, the same mass.

    The professionals confront an additional problem, the so called "mixing": the state vectors for particles according charge do not coincide exactly with the state vectors for particles according mass, the two sets being slightly displaced. This is the presumed cause of phenomena such as generation mixing and neutrino oscillation.
     
  12. Jun 16, 2004 #11
    arivero

    Many thanks once again for your reply.
    I now need some time to digest this and come up with what I hope will be a clear response. Will stop work on table until I have achieved a clear explanation of numerical part.
    elas
     
  13. Jun 25, 2004 #12
    Formula for field structure and some indication that formula applies to atoms (in addition to particles) is now on site. New script will follow soon.
    Tables show that there are only three fundamental particles, each particles has four states.
    There are two structure laws, one each for internally and externally balanced particles.
    Tables show the relationship between mass and charge. Text explains why particles have their particular mass and charge.
    Tables show that atomic fields probably obey the same structural law.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 26, 2004
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?



Similar Discussions: Fundamental particle structure table
Loading...