What is the origin of subatomic forces?

[NeilWallace]

I am curious as to what is the true nature of the atom and how far we can extrapolate backwards as to its primal cause. Are atoms caused by subatomic forces, or energy? Or are the terms 'Force' and 'Energy' metaphors for processes science does not fully understand yet.
If we are able to answer what atomic energy and force are then can we determine its original cause?

And the child's question what happened before the big bang? The answer because there was no time and space so nothing does not seem convincing to me. Is the big bang a metaphor too for a process that is still not fully understood.

I am curious too know what is the actual state of current physics, as it seems to me that these are fundamental questions that have still not been answered.

 

[Drakkith]

I don't believe your questions are answerable. No matter how far down or back you go, one can always ask what causes this, or why does this happen.

Energy is simply the ability of something to cause a change in something else. From dictionary.com : "the capacity to do work; the property of a system that diminishes when the system does work on any other system, by an amount equal to the work so done; potential energy"

Force is the method that produces the change in objects. "an influence on a body or system, producing or tending to produce a change in movement or in shape or other effects."

What are atoms caused by? They are caused by the existence of constituent particles which have mass and different forces that work on them. Perhaps someone else here can give you a better definition or explain it clearer.

 

[NeilWallace]

Thankyou for this answer. Hence Are we saying the structure of physical reality has a kind of infinite regression:

The everyday world (with its rule set) is caused by the atomic level (with a different rule set)-> which is in turn caused by the quantum level quarks etc. (a new rule set) which is caused by another deeper layer with a original rule set and so on into infinity.

From my limited understanding there seem to be those who think is a minimum bucket value of energy that cannot be divided further. I thiink this is the Quanta? if this is so how do the particles that compose a photon say derive their energy to institute change.

If it is the case that there is an infinite regression of particles each containing energy to influence and bring into being the behaviour of the greater particle of which it is a part - then can we prove this theory using physics or can we do the opposite and prove in fact 'this particular situation' outlined' is the cause of all reality with no preceeding preceding phenomena.

 

[dimensional]

Maybe not though, at least if we regard the Planck scale as being the most fundamental of theoretically observable scales.

 

[Drakkith]

Thankyou for this answer. Hence Are we saying the structure of physical reality has a kind of infinite regression:

The everyday world (with its rule set) is caused by the atomic level (with a different rule set)-> which is in turn caused by the quantum level quarks etc. (a new rule set) which is caused by another deeper layer with a original rule set and so on into infinity.

From my limited understanding there seem to be those who think is a minimum bucket value of energy that cannot be divided further. I thiink this is the Quanta? if this is so how do the particles that compose a photon say derive their energy to institute change.

If it is the case that there is an infinite regression of particles each containing energy to influence and bring into being the behaviour of the greater particle of which it is a part - then can we prove this theory using physics or can we do the opposite and prove in fact 'this particular situation' outlined' is the cause of all reality with no preceeding preceding phenomena.

The everyday world, the atomic worls, and the subatomic world all play by the same rule set. The only difference is that you cannot see how the rules play out at the atomic and subatomic levels and how they all add up to affect our everyday world.

Quanta more refers to the fact that energy is transferred in small chunks that cannot be divided. For example, an electron must absorb an entire photon or not interact at all. As far we know, a photon can be any amount of energy, but it must be transferred in one whole chunk.

Also, a photon is an elementary particle, which means that it is not composed of other particles and is indivisible.

Edit: Oh, my first response was meant in more of a general everyday manner. I encounter this a lot when i try to explain something to someone and they keep asking me "Why". Why is a photon an indivisible particle? Because everything we've ever observed has shown it to be. And still I get "Well, why is it like that?" Well...because it is.

 

[NeilWallace]

Thank you for clarifying all this it is very helpful. The idea of a photon as an elemental particle which is indivisible seems fascinating - I'll definately spend some time researching this curious beast and its activities!

 

[Drakkith]

Thank you for clarifying all this it is very helpful. The idea of a photon as an elemental particle which is indivisible seems fascinating - I'll definately spend some time researching this curious beast and its activities!

Check out wikipedia's page on subatomic particles. Also, there are plenty of books in your local bookstore or online at amazon.com or other places that are good reads.

 

[NeilWallace]

Thanks will do. .So photons are the smallest elementary particle. However, photons have different sizes according to the amount of energy within them. Does this mean that there is a maximum size of a photon above which size it does something else?

In terms of smallness is there a minimum amount of energy that can 'make a photon'. or can there be infinitesimly small amounts and hence infinitesimly small photons onwards into infinity.

The reason I am asking is to try get an understanding of whether reality blurs into infinity or has a 'straight edge' beneath which there is nothing.

Apologies if my conceptual undertstanding is 'way off'!