Baryons
All particles can be classified into two broad categories: leptons and hadrons. The main difference between the two is whether they interact through the strong interaction. Hadrons are particles that interact through all four fundamental interactions of nature, which include, strong, electromagnetic, weak, and gravitational interactions.
Hadrons, the strongly interacting particles, can be further subdivided into two classes based on their internal composition: mesons and baryons. Originally, mesons and baryons were classified according to their masses. Baryons were heavier than mesons, and both were heavier than leptons. Today mesons and baryons are distinguished by their internal structure. Baryons have masses greater than the proton mass. All hadrons are composed of two or three fundamental particles, which came to be known as quarks. A quark is always combined with one or two other quarks.
According to the original model proposed by Murray Gell-Mann and George Zweig in 1963, there were three types of quarks indicated by the symbols u, d, and s. These were given the arbitrary names up, down, and sideways (now referred to as strange). Associated with each quark is an anti-quark, which are the antimatter equivalents of quarks, opposite in electric charge. Later evidence allowed theorists to propose the existence of several more quarks: charm(c), top (t), and bottom (b). These six quarks species are paired with their “flavors”: up and down, top and bottom, and charm and strange.
A baryon is a "heavy" subatomic particle having strong interactions (a hadron) which either is a nucleon or can transform or decays into a final state of stable particles including a single nucleon plus eventually some ...
... middle of paper ...
...mber of weaknesses that lead physicists to search for a more complete theory of subatomic particles and their interactions. The present standard model, for example, cannot explain why there are three generations of quarks and leptons. It makes no predictions of the masses of the quarks and the leptons neither of the strengths of the various interactions. Physicists hope that, by probing the standard model in detail and making highly accurate measurements, they will discover some way in which the model begins to break down and thereby find a more complete theory. This may prove to be what is known as a grand unified theory, which uses a single theoretical structure to describe the strong, weak, and electromagnetic forces.
We are seeing only the conceptual results of this very mathematical theory, but we should realize that is it based on experimental evidence.
In closing, Popper’s notion of ad hoc-ness is a nuanced idea that gives the unification model more objectivity and helps to give it more support. By giving us the criteria to determine how to reject theories, Popper’s notion of ad hoc-ness allows us to further understand an otherwise intuitive model. Although the notion of ad hoc explanations isn’t the silver bullet for the unification model, it helps to complement it and give it more depth.
If nonphysical explanations have always failed and been replaced by physical explanations that succeeded, then we have good reason to think that nonphysical explanations will always fail, and physical explanations will always succeed.
believes it. There are also a few objections to his theory that raise questions as to if it can
Defend why you think this particular theory, over other theories or models, would be the best theory to use.
An atom, by definition, is the smallest part of any substance. The atom has three main components that make it up: protons, neutrons, and electrons. The protons and neutrons are within the nucleus in the center of the atom. The electrons revolve around the nucleus in many orbitals. These orbitals consist of many different shapes, including circular, spiral, and many others. Protons are positively charged and electrons are negatively charged. Protons and electrons both have charge of equal magnitude (i.e. 1.602x10-19 coulombs). Neutrons have a neutral charge, and they, along with protons, are the majority of mass in an atom. Electron mass, though, is negligible. When an atom has a neutral charge, it is stable.
... a theory should be able to explain a wide variety of things, not just only what it was intended to explain.
...ectron-proton pair into a neutron. The neutrons, however, can often stop the collapse and remain as a neutron star. Neutron stars are fascinating objects because they are the densest objects known. They are only about 10 miles in diameter, yet they are more massive than the Sun. One sugar cube of neutron star material weighs about 100 million tons, which is about as much as a mountain.
In 1803 this theory was finalised and stated that (1) all matter is made up of the smallest possible particles termed atoms, (2) atoms of a given element have unique characteristics and weight, and (3) three types of atoms exist: simple (elements), compound (simple molecules), and complex (complex molecules).
...ually throughout the processes of the theory, certain words and definitions need to be decided on and kept. Confusion prevails when the terms and ways to understand the theory are continually changing.
The theory of quantum mechanics has divided the atom into a number of fundamental sub-atomic particles. Although the physicist has shown that the atom is not a solid indivisible object, he has not been able to find a particle which does possess those qualities. Talk of particles, though, is misleading because the word suggests a material object. This is not the intention for the use of the word in quantum physics. Quantum particles are, instead, representations of the actions and reactions of forces at the sub-atomic level. In fact, physicists are less concerned with the search for a material particle underlying all physical objects and more interested in explaining how nature works. Quantum theory is the means that enables the physicist to express those explanations in a scientific way.
Alpha radiation/emission - Alpha particles are the nuclei of a Helium atom 42He. Consisting of two protons and two neutrons, positively charged.
Antimatter production is a relatively easy concept, but the details are mind bogeling. In 1932, Carl Anderson, was examining tracks produced by cosmic rays in a cloud chamber. One particle made a track like an electron, but carvature of its path in the magnetic field was one consistent with a possitive charged particle. He named this new particle a positron. Later, in the 1950’s, physicists at the Lawrence Radiation Lab used the Beratron accelerator to produce the anti-proton. Upon examination of this particle they found that it had the same mass and spin as a proton, but with negative charge and opposite magnetic moment. The process they used to create this particle with first to accelerate a proton to a very high speed, and then smash it into a target. This collision produces an antiproton and three protons, or in other words a proton antiproton pair and the two original protons. This seems to suggest that for each antiproton produced, there is one proton. This would sugget whole other worlds made of antimatter. However, this is a whole other debate.
A particle accelerator is a machine that accelerates particles, such as a proton or electron, to extremely high energies. These particles are accelerated to about the speed of light and the only difference between a weak particle accelerator and a strong one is that the stronger particle accelerator’s particles will have more kinetic energy. All particle accelerators have the same 3 basic parts, a source of ions, a tube pumped to a vacuum where the particles can travel, and a way of speeding up the particles. The use of particle accelerators are good and can help scientist better understand the universe and subatomic particle relations.
It shows that in this spherical universe one can go straight but never for very long. If you are certain you are going in a straight line think again. But these facts are known, if not by the general public then at least by mathematicians. However Max Born states the theory only holds water if the exact sphere of reference is specified, if nothing is certain then the sphere of reference can never be known to a point where there is no question as to it being perfect, therefore a basic theory of motion is null and void. The statement “nothing can be known with certainty'; holds true to the vast unending universe all the way down to the tinniest subatomic particle. Everything is moving; nothing can be studied to so exactly that there is no question about the object, because the act of studying an object changes the object.
“Don’t worry if your theory doesn’t agree with the observations, because they are probably wrong.’ But if your theory does not agree with the 2nd law of thermodynamics then it is in serious trouble”.