High School I've heard that particle physics is just like taxonomy and botany

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers around the comparison between particle physics and botany, sparked by a quote attributed to Enrico Fermi: "If I could remember all names of these particles I'd be a botanist." Participants assert that this analogy is misleading, emphasizing that the Standard Model of particle physics provides a unified framework for understanding fundamental particles and their interactions. The Standard Model consists of 19 free parameters, with an additional 7 from neutrino mixing, totaling 26 parameters necessary for describing all fundamental interactions. The conversation also highlights the historical context of Fermi's quote, noting it predates the development of the Standard Model.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of the Standard Model of particle physics
  • Familiarity with quantum chromodynamics (QCD) and quantum electrodynamics (QED)
  • Basic knowledge of particle physics terminology and concepts
  • Awareness of historical developments in particle physics
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the Standard Model of particle physics in detail
  • Learn about quantum chromodynamics (QCD) and quantum electrodynamics (QED)
  • Explore the historical context of particle discoveries and the evolution of the Standard Model
  • Read Griffiths' "Introduction to Elementary Particles" for a comprehensive overview
USEFUL FOR

Students and professionals in physics, particularly those interested in particle physics, quantum mechanics, and the historical development of scientific theories.

TechieDork
Messages
55
Reaction score
22
TL;DR
Please , provide me some insights
I've heard it from my classmates that particle physics is just like botany or when physics meets taxonomy.
There is even a quote from Enrico Fermi about this

"If I could remember all names of these particles I'd be a botanist"

I just want to know how true is that.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Total nonsense (*). Your classmates have no idea. Compare: having a periodic system of the elements doesn't make chemistry just like botany either.

(*) not the Fermi quote -- he just had a hunch there might be a system underneath -- and he was right !
 
BvU said:
Total nonsense (*). Your classmates have no idea. Compare: having a periodic system of the elements doesn't make chemistry just like botany either.

(*) not the Fermi quote -- he just had a hunch there might be a system underneath -- and he was right !

So, there is a simple principle/rule describing the galore of these particles.
 
There sure is. 'Standard model' is the search term
 
  • Like
Likes pinball1970
Well, let's add some emphasis to Fermi's quote:

TechieDork said:
"If I could remember all names of these particles I [woul]d be a botanist"

so he did not think it was necessary to remember those names (of course, many (particle) physicists still remember a lot of (not fundamental) particle names and properties, just from working with them for a good part of their lifetime).
 
  • Like
Likes TechieDork
BvU said:
There sure is. 'Standard model' is the search term

You mean...

images - 2019-10-15T184516.051.jpeg


Source : SymmetryMagazine
I hope I don't have to memorize this for my graduate class.
 
Go do botany :wink:
 
TechieDork said:
I hope I don't have to memorize this for my graduate class.
You don't have to. It's the particle physics equivalent of writing "13+5+17+26+39" instead of writing 100. Here is a more compact version:

SMLagrangian-768x443.png


If you learn some QFT and learn the meaning of these terms it is quite easy to remember.

The Standard Model has 19 free parameters, add 7 from neutrino mixing and you have everything you need to describe the fundamental interactions in every experiment ever done on Earth. That's 26 parameters we need to measure, and thousands of values we can calculate based on these 26 parameters.

Fermi's quote is from 1963 or earlier, by the way, before the Standard Model was developed. At that time people found more and more hadrons, but didn't understand how to describe them in a unified way. That's one of the big things the Standard Model provided.
 
  • Like
Likes dextercioby, pinball1970, Klystron and 2 others
mfb said:
Fermi's quote is from 1963 or earlier

I hope it's before he died in 1954! The alternative is frightening.

Actually, I doubt he said this. So far as I can tell, it only occurs in talk introductions by Lederman, who was very fond of, well, let's call them tall tales.
 
  • Like
Likes dextercioby, berkeman and BvU
  • #10
TechieDork said:
I've heard it from my classmates that particle physics is just like botany or when physics meets taxonomy.
This is an old fashioned point of view, probably from the '70s, when particle after particle were discovered and a unifying description hadn't been found yet. Now we have such a description: quantum chromodynamics and quantum electrodynamics.
 
  • Like
Likes Klystron
  • #11
Vanadium 50 said:
I hope it's before he died in 1954! The alternative is frightening.

Actually, I doubt he said this. So far as I can tell, it only occurs in talk introductions by Lederman, who was very fond of, well, let's call them tall tales.
Oh, didn't know he died so early. I found this mentioned 1963, so no matter who said it: The quote predates the SM.
 
  • #12
Griffiths' "Introduction to Elementary Particles" contains a nice history of the particle zoo and the path to the Standard Model.
 
  • Like
Likes dextercioby
  • #13
TechieDork said:
Summary: Please , provide me some insights

I've heard it from my classmates that particle physics is just like botany or when physics meets taxonomy.
There is even a quote from Enrico Fermi about this

"If I could remember all names of these particles I'd be a botanist"

I just want to know how true is that.
Reminds of the below.
'That which cannot be measured is not Science, Science that is not physics is just stamp collecting.'
Rutherford I think.
 
  • Like
Likes vanhees71

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
18K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K