Scientists Find Mystery Particle
(Click here to view the original thread with full colors/images)Posted by: Barbarossa
Scientists find mystery particle
By Dr David Whitehouse
BBC News Online science editor
Scientists have found a sub-atomic particle they cannot explain using current theories of energy and matter.
The discovery was made by researchers based at the High Energy Accelerator Research Organisation in Tsukuba.
Classified as X(3872), the particle was seen fleetingly in an atom smasher and has been dubbed the "mystery meson".
The Japanese team says understanding its existence may require a change to the Standard Model, the accepted theory of the way the Universe is constructed.
An eternity
X(3872) was found among the decay products of so-called beauty mesons - sub-atomic particles that are produced in large numbers at the Tsukuba "meson factory".
It weighs about the same as a single atom of helium and exists for only about one billionth of a trillionth of a second before it decays into other longer-lived, more familiar particles.
Although this is extremely short-lived by human standards, scientists say that a billionth of a trillionth of a second is nearly an eternity for a sub-atomic particle this heavy.
Particles smaller than the atom are grouped into families depending upon their mass, spin and electric charge.
But X(3872) is peculiar in that it does not fit easily into any known particle scheme and, as a result, has attracted a considerable amount of attention from the world's physics community.
New pairs
Its discovery was recently confirmed by researchers at the Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory in Illinois, US, home of the Tevatron, the world's largest atom smasher. It was the US outfit that gave X(3872) its mystery tag.
A normal meson is comprised of a quark and an antiquark held together by the "colour" force, also called the "strong" force because it is the most powerful known in nature.
The large variety of meson particles that have been found to date reflect the many different ways that these combinations can be achieved.
However, again, X(3872) does not match theoretical expectations for any conceivable quark-antiquark arrangement.
To explain it, theoretical physicists may have to modify their theory of the colour force; or make X(3872) the first example of a new type of meson, one that is made from four quarks (two quarks and two antiquarks).
Following on from similar scientific breakthroughs, I look forward to this discovery changing my life for the better...
:unsure: :blink:
Source (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/low/sci/tech/3277579.stm)
Posted by: titey
Originally posted by barbarossa@18 November 2003 - 09:39
To explain it, theoretical physicists may have to modify their theory of the colour force; or make X(3872) the first example of a new type of meson, one that is made from four quarks
Don't four quarks make a gallon? http://www.piczonline.com/client/titey/huh1.gif
Posted by: MediaSlayer
have u guys heard of wavicles? part wave , part particle? :lol: :lol: ;) :lol:
Posted by: imnotanaddict
Originally posted by barbarossa@18 November 2003 - 14:39
Scientists find mystery particle
By Dr David Whitehouse
BBC News Online science editor
Scientists have found a sub-atomic particle they cannot explain using current theories of energy and matter.
The discovery was made by researchers based at the High Energy Accelerator Research Organisation in Tsukuba.
Classified as X(3872), the particle was seen fleetingly in an atom smasher and has been dubbed the "mystery meson".
The Japanese team says understanding its existence may require a change to the Standard Model, the accepted theory of the way the Universe is constructed.
An eternity
X(3872) was found among the decay products of so-called beauty mesons - sub-atomic particles that are produced in large numbers at the Tsukuba "meson factory".
It weighs about the same as a single atom of helium and exists for only about one billionth of a trillionth of a second before it decays into other longer-lived, more familiar particles.
Although this is extremely short-lived by human standards, scientists say that a billionth of a trillionth of a second is nearly an eternity for a sub-atomic particle this heavy.
Particles smaller than the atom are grouped into families depending upon their mass, spin and electric charge.
But X(3872) is peculiar in that it does not fit easily into any known particle scheme and, as a result, has attracted a considerable amount of attention from the world's physics community.
New pairs
Its discovery was recently confirmed by researchers at the Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory in Illinois, US, home of the Tevatron, the world's largest atom smasher. It was the US outfit that gave X(3872) its mystery tag.
A normal meson is comprised of a quark and an antiquark held together by the "colour" force, also called the "strong" force because it is the most powerful known in nature.
The large variety of meson particles that have been found to date reflect the many different ways that these combinations can be achieved.
However, again, X(3872) does not match theoretical expectations for any conceivable quark-antiquark arrangement.
To explain it, theoretical physicists may have to modify their theory of the colour force; or make X(3872) the first example of a new type of meson, one that is made from four quarks (two quarks and two antiquarks).
Following on from similar scientific breakthroughs, I look forward to this discovery changing my life for the better...
:unsure: :blink:
Source (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/low/sci/tech/3277579.stm)
yeah buddy. :rolleyes:
Posted by: The Knife Thrower
Originally posted by MediaSlayer@18 November 2003 - 14:53
have u guys heard of wavicles? part wave , part particle? :lol: :lol: ;) :lol:
Arent waves made up of photons?
Posted by: 3rd gen noob
Originally posted by MediaSlayer@18 November 2003 - 14:53
have u guys heard of wavicles? part wave , part particle? :lol: :lol: ;) :lol:
you're talking about light?
Posted by: junkyardking
Light conforms to both a particle and a wave, so if you examine it to prove it's a particle it will conform to the rules and can be seen as a particle, the same if you try for a wave.
It's the process of examination that determines if it one or the other, so in the case of light it's both and the same depending on your point of view.
Posted by: Barbarossa
Originally posted by junkyardking@21 November 2003 - 00:04
Light conforms to both a particle and a wave, so if you examine it to prove it's a particle it will conform to the rules and can be seen as a particle, the same if you try for a wave.
It's the process of examination that determines if it one or the other, so in the case of light it's both and the same depending on your point of view.
Don't get me started on that nonsense.... :blink:
...although I saw this the other day which kind of almost explains it...?
Light can Twist as well as Spin (http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap031119.html)
http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/image/0311/photontwist_ug.jpg
Posted by: 3rd gen noob
Originally posted by junkyardking@21 November 2003 - 00:04
Light conforms to both a particle and a wave, so if you examine it to prove it's a particle it will conform to the rules and can be seen as a particle, the same if you try for a wave.
It's the process of examination that determines if it one or the other, so in the case of light it's both and the same depending on your point of view.
my old physics lecturer just used the term wave-particle duality
you could have saved yourself a bit of time there :P
Posted by: internet.news
interesting... maybe the particle is a part of the hidden p2p revolution ;) no,
you cannot expect of people sharing their thoughts openly, cause they are just humans. But probably, it is something ...
;)
Help, they discovered traces of my starship - huh...
Posted by: j2k4
The particle has been positively identified as a wee crumb from FC's last taste test of the new recipe "extra crunchy" KFC chicken.
It retained some residual static charge as a result of the speed with which FC ate that first bucket.
Science is soooooo disappointed. :(
Posted by: titey
:unsure: j2k4, you sure it's from the last test?If'n it was snagged in that beard of his.... who knows how long it's been? :blink:
Posted by: j2k4
Originally posted by titey@22 November 2003 - 23:19
:unsure: j2k4, you sure it's from the last test?If'n it was snagged in that beard of his.... who knows how long it's been? :blink:
Good point, titey. ;)
Carbon dating, perhaps? :huh: