Particle Oddities: Theories Explained

  • Thread starter Thread starter mathman
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Particle
mathman
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Messages
8,130
Reaction score
573
Is there any current theory for the following oddities?

1. Quarks come in pairs (up,down). (charm,strange), (top,bottom). The up and down are approximately the same size (mass). However, the charm is much heavier than the strange and the top is much heavier than the bottom. How come?

2. The only stable baryons (under normal conditions) are those made up of up and down quarks. The only stable charged lepton is the electron. However, in the case of neutrinos, they all seem to morph into each other. How come?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
mathman said:
Is there any current theory for the following oddities?in the case of neutrinos, they all seem to morph into each other. How come?

There are lots of theories and there is little consensus.
 
Hi mathman and ohwilleke
I live near the Soudan mine where there is an experiment underway to study neutrinos. I have read about it a little but have no reason to suppose that my information sources are different from yours. Neutrinos seem to go through a phase shift through the three types as they travel, etc.

We could collect a set of reference links here that might be of use in some study. I'll go look for things about Soudan and come back.

nc

A quick check of google for Soudan neutrinos turns up lots of news release stuff. And of course you can buy them on Ebay. Heck, I'll sell you some of mine if you are interested.

nc

here is a bite from the WCCO page:

"When operating, Fermi's half-mile-long accelerator will shoot 10 trillion neutrinos at Soudan every two seconds in pulses lasting only ten-millionths of a second. The neutrinos will arrive at Soudan after 2.5 milliseconds.

"Out of the trillions and trillions of neutrinos that are going to go up there each year, they expect to see about 1,500 collisions a year," said Fermi spokesman Mike Perricone. "

nc
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Thread 'Why is there such a difference between the total cross-section data? (simulation vs. experiment)'
Well, I'm simulating a neutron-proton scattering phase shift. The equation that I solve numerically is the Phase function method and is $$ \frac{d}{dr}[\delta_{i+1}] = \frac{2\mu}{\hbar^2}\frac{V(r)}{k^2}\sin(kr + \delta_i)$$ ##\delta_i## is the phase shift for triplet and singlet state, ##\mu## is the reduced mass for neutron-proton, ##k=\sqrt{2\mu E_{cm}/\hbar^2}## is the wave number and ##V(r)## is the potential of interaction like Yukawa, Wood-Saxon, Square well potential, etc. I first...
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
59
Views
9K
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
216
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
13
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Back
Top