6 ms·
Subatomic particle seen changing to antiparticle and back for the first time
- cma 5y agoThe bigger headline is it has some kind of mass difference between the two that could explain the antimatter/matter imbalance in the universe, a major unsolved physics problem. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_unsolved_problems_in_physics#Cosmology_and_general_relativity https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_unsolved_problems_in_p... (baryon asymmetry)
- api 5y agoIf it’s toggling back and forth and the mass changes, does this mean its momentum should also be changing since mass-energy are conserved? Seems to me that if a particle is flapping back and forth on mass and it’s energy were not changing this would be extremely weird and maybe even more significant. They should try to measure this if they haven’t already.
- throwaway481048 5y agoIs it not possible there is a (potentially massive) hole in our understanding of physics or perhaps even a whole different set of rules which we have yet to perceive and explore? I ask because along with the recent onset of quantum mechanics, proposed unified field theories, and the revived discussion of UFO phenomena in the US (specifically regarding US armed forces’ interactions with “them”), many state that the operation of these UFOs is simply not possible under our defined laws of physics. Thus, is it wise for us to assume a rule which has held true in our relatively simple world would not change at a different scales of physics? I’d think it best to be open minded as we explore these new frontiers, but do know that we are often driven to further understanding by our previous understanding. Disclaimer: I am NOT a professional working within physics or any directly related field.
- tinco 5y agoYes absolutely possible and also precisely the reason we are looking at these particles. The way science works is that we call these "assumptions" laws because we have never seen them broken and if we do it's likely some other assumption is wrong or our measurements are incorrect. But physics is always based on experiments, and if an experiment would show a violation of the law of conservation, and that experiment is repeatable and no one can find a flaw in it, then the law is changed. And this is not some idle theory based in idealism, it actually happened in a super real way multiple times the most famous one being when we dropped the Newtonian "laws" for special relativity and quantum physics. No one liked it, no one was happy with it, but physics is about what happens in reality, and reality is what dictates what the laws are. You probably get some downvotes for the UFO thing, but it doesn't really matter. Scientists don't need UFO's to question their assumptions, but they can be fine inspiration regardless.
- R0b0t1 5y agoThe momentum doesn't need to change. If the mass decreases it can just go faster.
- tzs 5y agoIf the mass changes from m0 to m1, the velocity has to change by a factor of m0/m1 to conserve momentum. But to conserve kinetic energy speed has to change by a factor of sqrt(m0/m1). Something else has to be involved to reconcile these conflicting velocity constraints.
- pletnes 5y agoHow does that work out in the at-rest frame of reference, when the particle is not moving?
- ezconnect 5y agoIn our current physics everything is always vibrating or moving.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- bolasanibk 5y agoDuplicate with more discussion. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27483949 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27483949
- noizejoy 5y agoThe big programmer in the sky, responsible for the entire simulation is having fun introducing new variables, whenever our science gets close to the edge of having figured out all of the existing variables. It’s like moving the cheese :-)
- codeulike 5y ago"There is a theory which states that if ever anyone discovers exactly what the Universe is for and why it is here, it will instantly disappear and be replaced by something even more bizarre and inexplicable. There is another theory which states that this has already happened." ― Douglas Adams, The Restaurant at the End of the Universe
- some_furry 5y agoIt has also happened 42 times already.
- interfixus 5y ago"Overhead, without any fuss, the stars were going out".
- drak0n1c 5y agoPerhaps probabilistic quantum effects offer a way to disguise deliberate runtime manipulations from internal observers.
- emerged 5y agoYou can also sneak in free will via those effects. The narrative of a purely mechanical deterministic world has fallen apart probably more than is recognized.
- wizzwizz4 5y agoFree will does not imply, nor require, determinism. Non-determinism (randomness) does not imply free will. The concepts are orthogonal.
- tambeb 5y agoDoes anyone know what writing style this article is using, if indeed it is a defined one? Specifically I'm referring to how quotations are done with colons and single quotes: So and so, said: 'The thing they said.'
- koreanguy 5y agoits all assumptions, antimatter is simulation of the mind
- Timothycquinn 5y agoTranslation: "Subatomic particle changing to antiparticle and back confirmed after hundreds of incremental tests and subsequent analysis showed a high enough degree of sigma of certainty"
- pbhjpbhj 5y agoSounds like neutrino mixing to me; which my naive view (physics graduate along time ago) is related to particles existing in higher dimensional spaces - my theory being they are projections in our 4D. I guess particle-antiparticle mixing could instead be a temporal phenomenon too?