Dr Neil Tyson said "the problem with physics today is that if you are a hammer then all your problems look like nails"
This video looks like a particle physicist answer to the problem, I but you could argue that if Energy= Matter and Energy is movement then each particle must be the result of smaller particles moving, therefore if the universe was composed of ever smaller particles all our answers would eventually run out of resolution to keep pondering. I like sting theory.
This math incorporates the conservation laws, and hence the force increases in such a representation, since there is no escape for a quark in a stable nucleon. But if you bombard a proton with high energy mesons, an endless strong force indicate that the incoming quarks cannot swap place with the quarks in the proton. In atoms the residual strong force between nucleons definitely has a limited range, and bonds can be broken. One math representation for several properties creates an illusion here
Gluons are not discovered as such - only some consequences of the force they represent is discovered. But whether that force is attraction by compression in a partial vacuum, or attraction by direct attraction, would probably give the same resulting radiation from scattering experiments. So in my view, gluons are just a mathematical representation of partial K-vacuum
The point was to show a possible concept for contraction by pressure = Force by proxy. A quark must have e certain structure which sets the limit for how close another quark can come, so yes, this is not shown, and must have as a consequence that the strong force appears to increase with distance. Quark confinement should not be mixed with the strong force directly
ok but isnt this already explained by the standard model? how quarks interact in every possible way? so far the only part of the model thats "broken" is the mass part ...wich wil probably be fixed if find the higgs ...and the gravity part ...wich is wierd.
Yes, mathematically the standard model is very, very close to correct. Like you may also mathematically explain planetary movements using earth as centre (epicircles etc). Correct math does not implicate that the understanding of attractive forces is correct - that is my point. And correct understanding will simplify the math and improve our understanding - that is my vision
This video appears to be made for those people who already have a tight grasp on how strong force works. IE: A book titled 'How to read Japanese' written in Japanese.
I wouldn't spend the Nobel money just yet.
hypernovie 1 month ago
i like puppies and baby turtles :p
interation66 4 months ago
i was looking for something more rudimentary but ok?
direwitch 1 year ago
Mr. Robo-scientist, would you please explain what the hell "K" means and would you also explain what Proxies and Ip's have to do with it?
aafrika0 1 year ago
Dr Neil Tyson said "the problem with physics today is that if you are a hammer then all your problems look like nails"
This video looks like a particle physicist answer to the problem, I but you could argue that if Energy= Matter and Energy is movement then each particle must be the result of smaller particles moving, therefore if the universe was composed of ever smaller particles all our answers would eventually run out of resolution to keep pondering. I like sting theory.
Ramiromasters 1 year ago
This math incorporates the conservation laws, and hence the force increases in such a representation, since there is no escape for a quark in a stable nucleon. But if you bombard a proton with high energy mesons, an endless strong force indicate that the incoming quarks cannot swap place with the quarks in the proton. In atoms the residual strong force between nucleons definitely has a limited range, and bonds can be broken. One math representation for several properties creates an illusion here
forcesbyproxy 1 year ago
@forcesbyproxy im a noob to physics (freshman at London) what are "K" (plural)???
bobbyradfo 9 months ago
lol asurpen center
mekansm 1 year ago
Gluons are not discovered as such - only some consequences of the force they represent is discovered. But whether that force is attraction by compression in a partial vacuum, or attraction by direct attraction, would probably give the same resulting radiation from scattering experiments. So in my view, gluons are just a mathematical representation of partial K-vacuum
forcesbyproxy 2 years ago
i feel as tho this concept is a little flawed ..
the strong force gets stronger as the quarks get further appart ....
opposite to gravity wich gets stronger as any particles get closer ...
this video implies different ...
sidewaysfcs0718 2 years ago
The point was to show a possible concept for contraction by pressure = Force by proxy. A quark must have e certain structure which sets the limit for how close another quark can come, so yes, this is not shown, and must have as a consequence that the strong force appears to increase with distance. Quark confinement should not be mixed with the strong force directly
forcesbyproxy 2 years ago
ok but isnt this already explained by the standard model? how quarks interact in every possible way? so far the only part of the model thats "broken" is the mass part ...wich wil probably be fixed if find the higgs ...and the gravity part ...wich is wierd.
sidewaysfcs0718 2 years ago
Yes, mathematically the standard model is very, very close to correct. Like you may also mathematically explain planetary movements using earth as centre (epicircles etc). Correct math does not implicate that the understanding of attractive forces is correct - that is my point. And correct understanding will simplify the math and improve our understanding - that is my vision
forcesbyproxy 2 years ago
ok but what about gluons? they are discovered in accelerators ..this video would somehow imply they arent needed ?
sidewaysfcs0718 2 years ago
This video appears to be made for those people who already have a tight grasp on how strong force works. IE: A book titled 'How to read Japanese' written in Japanese.
dcinstinct 2 years ago
que?
mariflak 2 years ago