What do tau particles DO? What is their function/purpose?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Joseph Ross Mayhew
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Particles
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the function and purpose of tau particles within the framework of particle physics. Participants explore whether subatomic particles, specifically tau leptons, have intrinsic purposes or roles in the universe, touching on philosophical implications as well as scientific perspectives.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Meta-discussion

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses frustration that introductory materials do not explain the function or purpose of tau leptons.
  • Another participant argues that physics does not assign functions or purposes to particles, stating that tau leptons are simply third-generation charged leptons that couple to the electroweak interaction.
  • Some participants assert that elementary particles, including tau leptons, have no intrinsic purpose and merely exist according to the laws of nature.
  • A historical perspective is provided, referencing the muon and its initial perception as having no role in nuclear interactions.
  • Several participants strongly believe that everything in the natural world must serve some purpose, questioning the validity of claims that tau leptons lack purpose.
  • One participant suggests that the search for purpose in science is essential, arguing against the idea that some particles might not have a function.
  • Another participant challenges the notion of purpose, asking for evidence that things must have a purpose and providing examples like random asteroids.
  • There is a discussion about the implications of removing tau leptons from the standard model and the potential consequences for theoretical consistency.
  • Some participants express a desire for science to tackle questions of purpose and meaning in the universe, while others caution against veering into pseudoscience.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

The discussion remains unresolved, with participants expressing competing views on whether tau leptons and other particles have intrinsic purposes. Some participants argue for the necessity of purpose in nature, while others maintain that such concepts are not applicable to the realm of physics.

Contextual Notes

Participants express differing philosophical views on the existence of purpose in nature, which may not align with scientific discourse. The discussion includes references to the implications of particle properties and their roles in theoretical frameworks, but no consensus is reached regarding the necessity of purpose.

Joseph Ross Mayhew
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Almost ALL introductory articles or videos on subatomic particles virtually NEVER tell you what some particles actually DO: what their function or purpose in the grand scheme of things is. The Tau lepton is a good case in point: even the Wikipedia article is absolutely silent regarding what the function or purpose of these heavy leptons is. Will someone PLEASE tell me what they do. Thanks in advance!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Physics doesn't ascribe functions or purposes to things. The universe doesn't exist for your (or anyone else's) benefit.

Tau leptons are 3rd-generation charged leptons. They couple to the electroweak interaction just like electrons and muons. They don't couple to the strong interaction. They decay with a mean lifetime of 0.3 picoseconds to a variety of final states, listed here: pdglive.lbl.gov/Particle.action?node=S035
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: mfb
Tau leptons and other elementary particles have no intrinsic purpose. They simply exist and obey all fundamental laws of nature. If the Tau lepton were stable, or at least had a much longer half-life, we might find some use for them, but those uses would be essentially arbitrary.
 
Physicists have been faced with this question before, when the muon ("sibling" of the electron and tau) was discovered:

The eventual recognition of the "mu meson" muon as a simple "heavy electron" with no role at all in the nuclear interaction, seemed so incongruous and surprising at the time, that Nobel laureate I. I. Rabi famously quipped, "Who ordered that?"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muon
 
Grrrr This is BOGUS! Every facet of the natural world must serve SOME purpose, or else it wouldn't exist at all. Everything MUST have purpose - it must contribute somethi9ng to the universe at large - otherwise, why would it even exist?
 
Joseph Ross Mayhew said:
Grrrr This is BOGUS! Every facet of the natural world must serve SOME purpose, or else it wouldn't exist at all. Everything MUST have purpose - it must contribute somethi9ng to the universe at large - otherwise, why would it even exist?
You are making this too philosophical, when really it is all about physics. We know the properties of these particles. Why should we need to know their purpose?
Btw, you should respect these people who are trying to help you instead of taking their knowledge as BOGUS.
 
Joseph Ross Mayhew said:
function or purpose in the grand scheme of things
What "grand scheme"? :oldwink:
 
Joseph Ross Mayhew said:
Grrrr This is BOGUS! Every facet of the natural world must serve SOME purpose, or else it wouldn't exist at all. Everything MUST have purpose - it must contribute somethi9ng to the universe at large - otherwise, why would it even exist?
There are other views which must be respected.
I would appreciate a proof that things must have a purpose.
 
Joseph Ross Mayhew said:
Grrrr This is BOGUS! Every facet of the natural world must serve SOME purpose, or else it wouldn't exist at all. Everything MUST have purpose - it must contribute somethi9ng to the universe at large - otherwise, why would it even exist?
Wait, there's a song from the '60s about this, right? Off to search for it...
 
  • #10
hmmmm... ok apologies. It just seems to me that its odd to have things existing without purpose or meaning. Didn't mean to offend. That said, I do think its a bit of a cop-out to say that something doesn't have a function: science is all about figuring out how the universe works: what its made of and how everything works together to make a unified whole. It may ultimately be found that there are in fact some things which serve no function at all, but in the meantime I think its our duty to try to figure out what things are good for - not just their properties.
 
  • #12
Joseph Ross Mayhew said:
Every facet of the natural world must serve SOME purpose, or else it wouldn't exist at all.
There is absolutely no evidence supporting that.
What is the "purpose" of a random asteroid flying through the solar system?If you would just remove the tau from the standard model, you wouldn't have gauge anomaly cancellation any more. You would have to modify more to keep a consistent theory. Remove the third generation of quarks? Then you lose CP violation and we would expect a perfect matter/antimatter symmetry, that doesn't lead to a universe as we know it. Change quark charges? That would also lead to a different universe. Same for lepton charges.
Joseph Ross Mayhew said:
hmmmm... ok apologies. It just seems to me that its odd to have things existing without purpose or meaning. Didn't mean to offend. That said, I do think its a bit of a cop-out to say that something doesn't have a function: science is all about figuring out how the universe works: what its made of and how everything works together to make a unified whole. It may ultimately be found that there are in fact some things which serve no function at all, but in the meantime I think its our duty to try to figure out what things are good for - not just their properties.
Assigning a purpose/function to things has nothing to do with physics. You assume that there are some goals. What are those goals? Whatever you define has to be completely arbitrary.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: BvU
  • #13
Thanks Berserkman! Thanks all as well: some things to think about. That said, I DO think that to say something has no purpose is kind of silly: seeking purpose and meaning in the universe should be something science should tackle, within limits: yes, a random asteroid may not have any Grand Meaning, but surely what is called a "fundamental particle", however short-lived, must have some function in making the universe the place we all know and some of us even love :=).
 
  • #14
Joseph Ross Mayhew said:
Thanks Berserkman! Thanks all as well: some things to think about. That said, I DO think that to say something has no purpose is kind of silly: seeking purpose and meaning in the universe should be something science should tackle, within limits: yes, a random asteroid may not have any Grand Meaning, but surely what is called a "fundamental particle", however short-lived, must have some function in making the universe the place we all know and some of us even love :=).
The problem, Joseph, is that such an approach leads to debates about pseudoscience and related topics, which we have learned from many years of experience to not allow here. We discuss mainstream science here, and those dicsussions are very valuable.

Please re-read the rules that you agreed to when you joined here, and post within the rules. This thread is closed.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: dlgoff and BvU

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
7K
  • · Replies 87 ·
3
Replies
87
Views
21K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K