In case you missed it, new particle just dropped.
-
@_thegeoff does it occur naturally, or is it something they created?
@avatastic It was created in the LHC, but much higher energy events happen naturally all over the universe, including when cosmic rays hit our atmosphere, daily. So they've never been observed in nature (tricky to get a hundred ton digital camera to the upper atmosphere in a trillionth of a second!), but it'd be unrealistic to say they don't.
-
@avatastic It was created in the LHC, but much higher energy events happen naturally all over the universe, including when cosmic rays hit our atmosphere, daily. So they've never been observed in nature (tricky to get a hundred ton digital camera to the upper atmosphere in a trillionth of a second!), but it'd be unrealistic to say they don't.
@avatastic Basically the LHC recreates low energy versions of things that happen when Earth is hit by cosmic rays, but in a more controlled and predictable way, and crucially *right in front of a very big digital camera*
-
@avatastic It was created in the LHC, but much higher energy events happen naturally all over the universe, including when cosmic rays hit our atmosphere, daily. So they've never been observed in nature (tricky to get a hundred ton digital camera to the upper atmosphere in a trillionth of a second!), but it'd be unrealistic to say they don't.
@_thegeoff groovy, thanks for that. i'm sure some undergraduate somewhere is now wondering if these can be created by supernova and that's why the stars gain enough mass to go neutron.
-
For non physics types, the quark names "up, down, charm, strange, top and bottom" are completely arbitrary and mean nothing, they're just placeholder names. Which is annoying, cos top and bottom were originally truth and beauty, which I prefer.
The also come in colours, and are far, far, far smaller than the wavelength of visible light. Again, an arbitrary name.
Lesson to all you physics coders, dumb variable names can stick if you're unlucky. Don't predict the "YourMomHadron".@_thegeoff aw I always found truth and beauty to be supremely weird. Like, the kind of names people would come up with if they were on drugs. (Which very well may have been the case, to be fair)
Strange and charm are also pretty weird but I guess I've become acclimated to them since there are no viable alternatives....
-
@_thegeoff aw I always found truth and beauty to be supremely weird. Like, the kind of names people would come up with if they were on drugs. (Which very well may have been the case, to be fair)
Strange and charm are also pretty weird but I guess I've become acclimated to them since there are no viable alternatives....
@diazona But you're fine with up and down? On the canvas of the Entire Universe?!
There's a bit of me that respects them not being called Q+2/3P1 etc (yeah, looking at you, gauge theories). But it does imply things in the general popsci field. On the whole I say keep the weird hippy names. And yes, very probably cos 1960s drugs.
-
@_thegeoff groovy, thanks for that. i'm sure some undergraduate somewhere is now wondering if these can be created by supernova and that's why the stars gain enough mass to go neutron.
@avatastic Stars collapse into neutron stars because the electrons and quarks interact in a way that forces the up/up/down protons to flip into up/down/down neutrons. Moving up to the energy levels involving charm quarks would make things...interesting...!
Have a google on "strangelets" or "strange matter" if you fancy some of the scary scifi end of actual physics -
For non physics types, the quark names "up, down, charm, strange, top and bottom" are completely arbitrary and mean nothing, they're just placeholder names. Which is annoying, cos top and bottom were originally truth and beauty, which I prefer.
The also come in colours, and are far, far, far smaller than the wavelength of visible light. Again, an arbitrary name.
Lesson to all you physics coders, dumb variable names can stick if you're unlucky. Don't predict the "YourMomHadron".This post did not contain any content. -
@_thegeoff aw I always found truth and beauty to be supremely weird. Like, the kind of names people would come up with if they were on drugs. (Which very well may have been the case, to be fair)
Strange and charm are also pretty weird but I guess I've become acclimated to them since there are no viable alternatives....
@diazona @_thegeoff "Strange" is at least understandable given the history.
-
@diazona @_thegeoff "Strange" is at least understandable given the history.
@skyglowberlin @diazona I was a first year physics undergrad when the last quark discovery was announced. Much excitement through the department. You may say a "top" day...?
Thank you, I'll be here all weak. -
In case you missed it, new particle just dropped. The LHC has confirmed (and in ridiculous accuracy) the existence of a heavier version of the proton.
A proton is made of 3 quarks, up/up/down. This new particle is made of charm/charm/down, where the charm quark is basically the same as the up, just heavier.
So not groundbreaking like finding supersymmetric particles, but still cool. Further confirmation that the standard model of particle physics is reasonable.
https://home.cern/news/news/physics/lhcb-collaboration-discovers-new-proton-particle@_thegeoff Whoa!
-
@diazona But you're fine with up and down? On the canvas of the Entire Universe?!
There's a bit of me that respects them not being called Q+2/3P1 etc (yeah, looking at you, gauge theories). But it does imply things in the general popsci field. On the whole I say keep the weird hippy names. And yes, very probably cos 1960s drugs.
@_thegeoff
yeahAll things considered, I prefer physics being weird to the opposite
-
@diazona @_thegeoff "Strange" is at least understandable given the history.
@skyglowberlin @_thegeoff Oh yeah that's a good point. That's probably part of why I don't mind "strange" and "charm", too: the names have little historical lessons about their discoveries embedded in them. "Truth" and "beauty" on the other hand always felt completely arbitrary to me.
-
@skyglowberlin @_thegeoff Oh yeah that's a good point. That's probably part of why I don't mind "strange" and "charm", too: the names have little historical lessons about their discoveries embedded in them. "Truth" and "beauty" on the other hand always felt completely arbitrary to me.
@diazona @_thegeoff I remember "strange particles", but I don't remember ever hearing an explanation for where "charm" came from.
I just looked it up on Wikipedia, and
Since up and down are also arbitrary, "strange" is the only name of the six that I think is reasonable
-
For non physics types, the quark names "up, down, charm, strange, top and bottom" are completely arbitrary and mean nothing, they're just placeholder names. Which is annoying, cos top and bottom were originally truth and beauty, which I prefer.
The also come in colours, and are far, far, far smaller than the wavelength of visible light. Again, an arbitrary name.
Lesson to all you physics coders, dumb variable names can stick if you're unlucky. Don't predict the "YourMomHadron".@_thegeoff I don't think colours are _entirely_ arbitrary though: afaik they are related to SU(3) irreps, so there are 3 basis states, and we have 3 coloured sensors in eyes, so...
But yeah, it's just that 3 equals 3 and nothing deeper
-
In case you missed it, new particle just dropped. The LHC has confirmed (and in ridiculous accuracy) the existence of a heavier version of the proton.
A proton is made of 3 quarks, up/up/down. This new particle is made of charm/charm/down, where the charm quark is basically the same as the up, just heavier.
So not groundbreaking like finding supersymmetric particles, but still cool. Further confirmation that the standard model of particle physics is reasonable.
https://home.cern/news/news/physics/lhcb-collaboration-discovers-new-proton-particle@_thegeoff I'm sorry but since it does not yet have an official name; we'll be referring to it as the "Chonk Proton" for now.
-
@_thegeoff I'm sorry but since it does not yet have an official name; we'll be referring to it as the "Chonk Proton" for now.
@laprice @_thegeoff Shortened to 'chonkon' of course.
-
@laprice @_thegeoff Shortened to 'chonkon' of course.
@JeremiahFieldhaven @_thegeoff
naturally -
In case you missed it, new particle just dropped. The LHC has confirmed (and in ridiculous accuracy) the existence of a heavier version of the proton.
A proton is made of 3 quarks, up/up/down. This new particle is made of charm/charm/down, where the charm quark is basically the same as the up, just heavier.
So not groundbreaking like finding supersymmetric particles, but still cool. Further confirmation that the standard model of particle physics is reasonable.
https://home.cern/news/news/physics/lhcb-collaboration-discovers-new-proton-particle@_thegeoff This is really cool.
-
@_thegeoff This is really cool.
@kimlockhartga Yup. A lot of the stuff coming out of the LHC post-Higgs tends to fail to ignite popular curiosity, even though it's essentially part of the same model. But this being directly relatable to high school physics gives brownie points!
-
In case you missed it, new particle just dropped. The LHC has confirmed (and in ridiculous accuracy) the existence of a heavier version of the proton.
A proton is made of 3 quarks, up/up/down. This new particle is made of charm/charm/down, where the charm quark is basically the same as the up, just heavier.
So not groundbreaking like finding supersymmetric particles, but still cool. Further confirmation that the standard model of particle physics is reasonable.
https://home.cern/news/news/physics/lhcb-collaboration-discovers-new-proton-particle@_thegeoff@mastodon.social TIL:
- CERN is a TLD
- this is not a shitpost and charm quarks are real.
