Is Masslessness Possible for Pointlike Particles in Our 3D Universe?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Daveman20
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Particle
Daveman20
Messages
21
Reaction score
0
So a particle is pointlike, meaning it could verywell be massless, but anything and everything we experience is 3d, so are there any examples of something that is 2d that is also in this 3d universe?
 
Physics news on Phys.org


how then could anything have mass if everything is made up of particles? You say we can't experience anything that isn't 3d, yet ask for an example of something that has only 2. Anything without depth has only 2 dimensions. A still image of anything with depth will seem like there was distance from the primary observers vantage point to the furthest away from him in it, but there is no space between postsecondary frame of references, meaning only the primary observer could have seen actual spatiality. if an atom extends so far in actual dimensions, can't we say unlike lines, its scope cannot be comprised of infinite points? For example, if a marble represented all the particles that an atom is comprised of, since something that gives everything mass must have mass itself, and the distance between your thumb and index represented the distance of a line segment that math says has infinite points in between, then why can your fingers only squeeze it so hard? Is it because massless pointlike particles are imaginary?
 
Last edited:


No, a particle is NOT "pointlike". That is just a useful model for very small objects.
 
Toponium is a hadron which is the bound state of a valance top quark and a valance antitop quark. Oversimplified presentations often state that top quarks don't form hadrons, because they decay to bottom quarks extremely rapidly after they are created, leaving no time to form a hadron. And, the vast majority of the time, this is true. But, the lifetime of a top quark is only an average lifetime. Sometimes it decays faster and sometimes it decays slower. In the highly improbable case that...
I'm following this paper by Kitaev on SL(2,R) representations and I'm having a problem in the normalization of the continuous eigenfunctions (eqs. (67)-(70)), which satisfy \langle f_s | f_{s'} \rangle = \int_{0}^{1} \frac{2}{(1-u)^2} f_s(u)^* f_{s'}(u) \, du. \tag{67} The singular contribution of the integral arises at the endpoint u=1 of the integral, and in the limit u \to 1, the function f_s(u) takes on the form f_s(u) \approx a_s (1-u)^{1/2 + i s} + a_s^* (1-u)^{1/2 - i s}. \tag{70}...

Similar threads

Replies
14
Views
3K
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
10
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
2K
Back
Top