Notices
Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: Does anyone still posit an "indivisible" particle?

  1. #1 Does anyone still posit an "indivisible" particle? 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    6
    This use to be the atom. Since the atom is obviously a manifestation of several interacting particles, does the notion the Atom once comprised still around..namely, something you just cant break any further? What it's called?

    Also, I wonder if there ISN'T such a particle. What if every seemingly smaller particle we find always is a macroscopic view of more particles? If the small always gets smaller - imagine like the theory of a static cosmos, never ending or beginning beyond our observable and nonobservable multiverse(s)- do you think it's possible to imagine that somehow, these two phenoms of infinitly small and infinitly large, loop into and of each other? Is this a theory yet?Can I name it? It's as valid and incomplete as any Theory of Everything. Kiss my astrophysicist.


    If the whole of the cosmos in and surrounding earth is simply a mathematical chemical soup, than getting a blow job outside o during math class was extra credit, and the American Educational system failed me yet again.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    39
    The atom is made up of protons, neutrons and electrons.

    Protons and neutrons are made up of quarks while the electrons belong to a family of particles called leptons.

    As far as I know quarks and leptons are the most elementary particles for which there is a general scientific consensus.


    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    . DrRocket's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    5,486
    Quote Originally Posted by ScienceWizard
    The atom is made up of protons, neutrons and electrons.

    Protons and neutrons are made up of quarks while the electrons belong to a family of particles called leptons.

    As far as I know quarks and leptons are the most elementary particles for which there is a general scientific consensus.
    That is a pretty good summary.

    This Wiki article summarizes the fundamental particles of the Standard Model and also talks a little bit about some more speculative ideas. It gives a nice compact summary of the zoo.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elementary_particles
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,035
    Quantum theory predicts that all particles are waves, and therefore capable of things like superposition. They can temporarily occupying the same location, or split into separate waves and then reassemble somewhere further down the way. (It's debated whether they really split or not, but nobody can detect which path the particle is taking between the two paths, so interpreting that as a split is one possible interpretation.)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    The Edge
    Posts
    189
    If you're familiar with the 'epicycles' of the astronomy of previous centuries... well I think that current particle physics is suffering from the same problem. There *aren't* so many 'particles' (the epicycles, by analogy). We need a Kepler to re-see the data in a new and simple way that will simplify the model.

    Kepler wiped away 400 years of intense, but wrong, analysis. Did he make new observations? Not so much. Did he look at the same data in a (magnificently) new way?

    Any year now.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •