4 ms·

This is the best summary I've read (not that I've read much) but it really puts things in perspective. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm going to try to summari

This is the best summary I've read (not that I've read much) but it really puts things in perspective. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm going to try to summarize to make sure I understand: The properties of protons, neutrons, and electrons that make them unique/distinct from each other (mass, electric charge) arise from the composition of each out of smaller particles, which each are/carry/act as the respective mass + charge + the other properties. Is there any theory as to what this "looks" like? Or is the best we can do "it's a bunch of these things mashed together and the only way to see them individually is to bash them together until they break"? If the strong and weak forces are particles, does that mean they're 1: literally everywhere, not necessarily stuck to any larger particle and 2: like glue? I'm also confused about the relationship between gravity and mass, given that the higgs is stated as corresponding to mass, mass is traditionally thought of as what gravity acts upon, but the wikipedia chart states that gravity acts upon all particles. What a rabbit hole...

Retra 10y ago
You've got it backwards. Fields are fundamental. Nature is just one big complicated multi-component field. The field is quantized in various ways that make state 'clump' in discrete ways: these are particles. The strong and weak force are mediated by particles because strong and weak interactions are comprised of quantized state transitions. Gravity is a field, and mass is a property of how it is quantized. The Higgs particle is a description / side-effect of this quantization.
gus_massa 10y ago
There are a few errors in your comment. I hope my comment can clarify some of them. Electrons, Positrons, Neutrinos, Muons, ... are elementary particles. You can't break them. Protons, Neutrons, ... are composed by three quarks. Quarks are elementary particles that you can't break. The quarks inside the proton and neutron are bounded by the strong force. The strong force is really strong so no one have seen an isolated quarks. We only know they are formed by three quarks because if we make them collide at high speed the quarks from one of them can be recombined with the quark of the other and form a few new particles. It's more complicated, because during the collisions it is possible to create a pair of quark-antiquark. So if you collide a proton and an antiproton at a high speed, after the collision you have to rearrange the 3 quarks from the proton, the 3 antiquarks from the antiproton, and all the quarks and antiquarks that appeared in the collision. The exact number of pairs of quarks and antiquarks and their favors are determined by probabilities derived from difficult calculations. And actually, all this mess is not instantaneous, the quarks can rearrange themselves in some particles that later decay in other particles with other quarks. In particular in this experiment they didn't see the "new" particles directly, because they live for a very short time. They only saw the particles that were formed after the "new" particle decayed. --- About > If the strong and weak forces are particles No. It's important to distinguish the difference between a force and the particles that are the carriers of the force. The differences and relations are subtle, so it's better do delay the discussion for another day > gravity ... mass ... higgs They are also different things, that are interrelated but different.
danbruc 10y ago
The properties of protons, neutrons, and electrons that make them unique/distinct from each other (mass, electric charge) arise from the composition of each out of smaller particles, which each are/carry/act as the respective mass + charge + the other properties. Protons and neutrons are composite, made out of two up and one down respectively two down and one up quark. Plus gluons holding them together. There are also four other quarks, bottom, top, charm, and strange. And of course one antiquark for each of the six quarks. There is a huge number of particles made out of quarks, called hadrons. Hadrons are either baryons like the proton and neutron made out of three quarks, or mesons made out of one quark and one anti quark. There are also exotic things like tetraquarks. Electrons are, as far as we know, fundamental and not made out of other particles. The same goes for the muon, the tau, and the three accompanying neutrinos. There is again an antiparticle for each particle. This group is called leptons. The properties of composite particles are determined by their constituents, but not in a trivial way. The mass for example is usually bigger than the mass of the constituents because the binding energy contributes to the mass. Is there any theory as to what this "looks" like? Or is the best we can do "it's a bunch of these things mashed together and the only way to see them individually is to bash them together until they break"? Quantum chromo dynamics is the theory of quarks and gluons. If the strong and weak forces are particles, does that mean they're 1: literally everywhere, not necessarily stuck to any larger particle and 2: like glue? The electromagnetic, the strong, and the weak interaction are mediated by their respective bosons, we also suspect it for gravity. You can observe the bosons on their own, they are not like springs and rubber bands connecting particles between wich they mediated forces. Actually there are not really any photons bouncing back and forth between two electrons pushing them away from each other due to their like charges. But I can not offer any good model, that is something I never managed to really understand. I'm also confused about the relationship between gravity and mass, given that the higgs is stated as corresponding to mass, mass is traditionally thought of as what gravity acts upon, but the wikipedia chart states that gravity acts upon all particles. Most mass comes from [binding] energy, the Higgs mechanism contributes only a small bit. The Higgs boson has nothing to to with that at all, it is just an excitation in the Higgs field. Gravity acts on energy. As far as I can tell mass is just an abstraction. If you put massless photons into a mirror box to bounce around, they add energy to the box which makes the box harder to move, i.e. you have to push against the photons hitting the wall you are pushing on. As a convenient abstraction we say the box got heavier, it has more mass, but there is actually nothing fundamentally heavy in the box, the photons have no mass, only their energy and momentum with which they hit the wall making it harder for you to push it. I am not a physicist, take all this with grains of salt.
swivelmaster 10y ago
Thanks everybody for piling on to explain how and where I'm wrong. I read all the comments and I'm probably two or three percent closer to understanding this. Maybe I'll devote some more brain energy to it later :)

Retra 10y ago

You've got it backwards. Fields are fundamental. Nature is just one big complicated multi-component field. The field is quantized in various ways that make state 'clump' in discrete ways: these are particles. The strong and weak force are mediated by particles because strong and weak interactions are comprised of quantized state transitions. Gravity is a field, and mass is a property of how it is quantized. The Higgs particle is a description / side-effect of this quantization.

gus_massa 10y ago

There are a few errors in your comment. I hope my comment can clarify some of them. Electrons, Positrons, Neutrinos, Muons, ... are elementary particles. You can't break them. Protons, Neutrons, ... are composed by three quarks. Quarks are elementary particles that you can't break. The quarks inside the proton and neutron are bounded by the strong force. The strong force is really strong so no one have seen an isolated quarks. We only know they are formed by three quarks because if we make them collide at high speed the quarks from one of them can be recombined with the quark of the other and form a few new particles. It's more complicated, because during the collisions it is possible to create a pair of quark-antiquark. So if you collide a proton and an antiproton at a high speed, after the collision you have to rearrange the 3 quarks from the proton, the 3 antiquarks from the antiproton, and all the quarks and antiquarks that appeared in the collision. The exact number of pairs of quarks and antiquarks and their favors are determined by probabilities derived from difficult calculations. And actually, all this mess is not instantaneous, the quarks can rearrange themselves in some particles that later decay in other particles with other quarks. In particular in this experiment they didn't see the "new" particles directly, because they live for a very short time. They only saw the particles that were formed after the "new" particle decayed. --- About > If the strong and weak forces are particles No. It's important to distinguish the difference between a force and the particles that are the carriers of the force. The differences and relations are subtle, so it's better do delay the discussion for another day > gravity ... mass ... higgs They are also different things, that are interrelated but different.

danbruc 10y ago

The properties of protons, neutrons, and electrons that make them unique/distinct from each other (mass, electric charge) arise from the composition of each out of smaller particles, which each are/carry/act as the respective mass + charge + the other properties. Protons and neutrons are composite, made out of two up and one down respectively two down and one up quark. Plus gluons holding them together. There are also four other quarks, bottom, top, charm, and strange. And of course one antiquark for each of the six quarks. There is a huge number of particles made out of quarks, called hadrons. Hadrons are either baryons like the proton and neutron made out of three quarks, or mesons made out of one quark and one anti quark. There are also exotic things like tetraquarks. Electrons are, as far as we know, fundamental and not made out of other particles. The same goes for the muon, the tau, and the three accompanying neutrinos. There is again an antiparticle for each particle. This group is called leptons. The properties of composite particles are determined by their constituents, but not in a trivial way. The mass for example is usually bigger than the mass of the constituents because the binding energy contributes to the mass. Is there any theory as to what this "looks" like? Or is the best we can do "it's a bunch of these things mashed together and the only way to see them individually is to bash them together until they break"? Quantum chromo dynamics is the theory of quarks and gluons. If the strong and weak forces are particles, does that mean they're 1: literally everywhere, not necessarily stuck to any larger particle and 2: like glue? The electromagnetic, the strong, and the weak interaction are mediated by their respective bosons, we also suspect it for gravity. You can observe the bosons on their own, they are not like springs and rubber bands connecting particles between wich they mediated forces. Actually there are not really any photons bouncing back and forth between two electrons pushing them away from each other due to their like charges. But I can not offer any good model, that is something I never managed to really understand. I'm also confused about the relationship between gravity and mass, given that the higgs is stated as corresponding to mass, mass is traditionally thought of as what gravity acts upon, but the wikipedia chart states that gravity acts upon all particles. Most mass comes from [binding] energy, the Higgs mechanism contributes only a small bit. The Higgs boson has nothing to to with that at all, it is just an excitation in the Higgs field. Gravity acts on energy. As far as I can tell mass is just an abstraction. If you put massless photons into a mirror box to bounce around, they add energy to the box which makes the box harder to move, i.e. you have to push against the photons hitting the wall you are pushing on. As a convenient abstraction we say the box got heavier, it has more mass, but there is actually nothing fundamentally heavy in the box, the photons have no mass, only their energy and momentum with which they hit the wall making it harder for you to push it. I am not a physicist, take all this with grains of salt.

swivelmaster 10y ago

Thanks everybody for piling on to explain how and where I'm wrong. I read all the comments and I'm probably two or three percent closer to understanding this. Maybe I'll devote some more brain energy to it later :)