Elementary Particles,an Unknown Substructure
Elementary Particles,an Unknown Substructure
MICHAEL BALMER·MONDAY, APRIL 17, 2017
There was a time, when the atom was considered the elementary particle of all matter,this is understandable for the era of physics as it grew through methods of experimentations to the theorist concepts of the nature where conjecture to mathematics was not adequent to provide substance needed for the accurate predictions being asserted of the era,the elementary particles or fundamental particles as another term used is simply put as no constituates,no structure or an unknown substructure.
In accordance with the Standard Model of Particle Physics,the Standard Model of Elementary Particles given is of seventeen particles including Quarks,Fermions,Guage Bosons and the latter Scalar Boson,six quarks,six leptons, four guage... which would be the Fundamental Forces of Nature and the Higgs,this is the way they are seen today,as of this writing, yet not prior to 1910,with a side note that until the early 1960’s with the research of the quarks, protons and neutrons were still elementary particles and that removed two of the three atomic particles yet left behind the Electron as the sole elementary particle of the atom and remains there now because no structure,hence no substructure has been found,though a better stated reason would be unknown substructure,and the reason for that is it is just too small for adequent experimentation and... to have it stay in one place long enough,then the other lepton,the Neutrino which is even smaller,faster and to the most part not hindered by matter,like trying to swat a gnat with tennis racket.
When we look further into the term elementary particle we find all the given above groups of particle comes down to the same reasons of being elementary,that is because of the unknown substructure and although they have the classification, they also have the same question of them,what makes a quark,an electron,a neutrino,the guage and scalar bosons?that question keeps alive the possibility of there may not be actual elementary particles,maybe we should rename them Stable Particles instead since that term refers to a particle that is not intransition to another sub-particle because there is no sub-particle to decay to it doesn’t have an unknown substructure, would that however creates issues when referring to atoms and their isotopes being stable particles,or maybe elementary subatomic particles.
So is the term of a real meaning or just a way of saying we don’t know or not having the ability to be sure,that there are limitations,is there an actual use in saying a quark is a elementary particle,not really no,there are no concepts or thought experiment in open forums found that are based on the assumption,though i wouldn’t mind a discussion on that issue.
There are concepts being researched on the unknown substructure of the electron,which appears to be the last frontier of the electron unless it is coupled with the issues of the Uncertainty Principle.of course they would be theoretical until experiments are made of the electron in that capacity,there is research into isolating a quark and gluon for study,on going study on the Higgs,the photon,though it appears not so much on the W and Z bosons,so these researches seem to suggest the acceptance of elementary particles is not fully accepted and it should not be as long as that question remains.
Personal speaking,though the notion of the W and Z bosons seems intriguing,the electron has my eye,i do not accept the electron as just charges with very little to no mass,i see it no differently than the Baryons,as composite particles,i come to this conclusion because of not accepting the quark is only the constituate of the nucleon,i do not accept quarks can not be a small enough bit of matter for the electron when the difference other than the charge sign of the proton is it’s size and it’s size should not say a quark will not fit,how about a quark that will fit the structure of an electron when a structure has not been ruled out by experiment,when quarks have not been isolated from a nuclei to be studied,so i model the electron on the same basis as a nuclei which by being correct would release the electron from being elementary,alas,as of yet, there are no experiments for this,so it remains,an Unknown Substructure whichs makes it an Elementary Particle.
Giuseppe BellottiIi checked the link for : Electromagnetic shower with interesting positrons.but it said "Not found ",it is interesting to have Gammy ray from the electron/positron annihilation,it is not allowed but under certain conditions,mainly because there isn't enough (mass) though i would say base "matter " to produce the massive Gamma Ray,i will look at the paper again to see where you have ascertained this,i remember you stating to the effect you are not looking at the event as producing photons.
[sin(kr+ot)]/r=[sin(kr)]/r*cos(ot)+[cos(kr)]/r*sin(ot) is a gamma ray that becomes an electron/positron pair and vice versa? If so, we can study the substructure of electron and positron ... or not?
I find your posts interesting and thought provoking. I will try to reframe from reiterating my macro analogy of corrugated sheet modeling bosons and corrugated panel modeling fermions. Opps, I did it again;-)