CERN: The Standard Model Of Particle Physics

http://www.facebook.com/ScienceReason ... The Standard Model Of Particle Physics. This film was produced as part of the CERN/ATLAS multimedia contest internship.

---
Please SUBSCRIBE to Science & Reason:
• http://www.youtube.com/Best0fScience
• http://www.youtube.com/ScienceTV
• http://www.youtube.com/FFreeThinker
---

STANDARD MODEL OF PARTICLE PHYSICS:
http://www.youtube.com/user/Best0fScience#g/c/4A8C50311C9F7369

1) First Second Of The Universe:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4HXPYO5YFG0
2) Force And Matter:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p5QXZ0__8VU
3) Quarks:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PxQwkdu9WbE
4) Gluons:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZYPem05vpS4
5) Electrons, Protons And Neutrons:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vi91qyjuknM
6) Photons, Gravitons & Weak Bosons:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JHVC6F8SOFc
7) Neutrinos:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m7QAaH0oFNg
8) The Higgs Boson / The Higgs Mechanism:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1_HrQVhgbeo

---

The standard model of particle physics is a theory concerning the electromagnetic, weak and strong nuclear interactions which mediate the dynamics of the known subatomic particles. Developed throughout the early and middle 20th century, the current formulation was finalized in the mid 1970s upon experimental confirmation of the existence of quarks. Since then, discoveries of the bottom quark (1977), the top quark (1995) and the tau neutrino (2000) have given credence to the standard model. Because of its success in explaining a wide variety of experimental results, the standard model is sometimes regarded as a theory of almost everything.

Still, the standard model falls short of being a complete theory of fundamental interactions because it does not incorporate the physics of general relativity, such as gravitation and dark energy. The theory does not contain any viable dark matter particle that possesses all of the required properties deduced from observational cosmology. It also does not correctly account for neutrino oscillations (and their non-zero masses). Although the standard model is theoretically self-consistent, it has several unnatural properties giving rise to puzzles like the strong CP problem and the hierarchy problem.

Nevertheless, the standard model is important to theoretical and experimental particle physicists alike. For theoreticians, the standard model is a paradigm example of a quantum field theory, which exhibits a wide range of physics including spontaneous symmetry breaking, anomalies, non-perturbative behavior, etc. It is used as a basis for building more exotic models which incorporate hypothetical particles, extra dimensions and elaborate symmetries (such as supersymmetry) in an attempt to explain experimental results at variance with the Standard Model such as the existence of dark matter and neutrino oscillations. In turn, the experimenters have incorporated the standard model into simulators to help search for new physics beyond the standard model from relatively uninteresting background.

Recently, the standard model has found applications in other fields besides particle physics such as astrophysics and cosmology, in addition to nuclear physics.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_Model
.

Category:

Science & Technology

Tags:

• standard
• model
• of
• particle
• physics
• electromagnetic
• weak
• strong
• nuclear
• fundamental
• forces
• interactions
• cern
• lhc
• atlas
• experiments
• subatomic
• atoms
• quarks
• electrons
• photons
• neutrinos
• oscillations
• quantum
• field
• theory
• super
• symmetry
• dark
• matter
• energy

[mattakudesu]

religious people have no idea just how amazing our universe is. why settle for a primitive fairy tale when you see how mind blowing our actual universe is?

[mattakudesu]

@TheMaggotdick look dude, its not my fault that you choose to believe in something that you have no good reason to believe. i stick with science because i know it works, i dont have to "pray" it works. if you get your feelings hurt because someone makes fun of your imaginary friend, you probably shouldnt have an imaginary friend in the first place. i could see if i was making fun of a disability or something, then i would be in the wrong. but, religion is clearly a joke, a bad one.

[mattakudesu]

@arthurbulan i think its primitive and ignorant when creationists say that the world is only 6 to 10 thousand years old despite the archives of evidence that say otherwise. i think its primitive and ignorant when creationists deny evolution even though we reap the benefits of evolution study (medicine and such) and we can even control it to a very small degree. how about this, would you consider it primitive and ignorant if i said that creationists have very little understanding about the world?

[exposer1997]

@RichtoffenRoach i care =) ahaha i don't know why I said that. stop being pathetic and say something worth reading

[aliofisher]

I dunno.... I believe in science in all of its aspects but I do believe a higher power (i.e. God) created all of it..... kinda calming and beautiful really - it's like we're working our way closer to shaking His hand :)

[ebutemetube]

Where's the muzak off button?

[arthurbulan]

@mattakudesu It is quite primitive and ignorant of you to say that creationists have no understanding of our marvelous universe

[RichtoffenRoach]

@TheMaggotdick Who cares?

[mattakudesu]

@TherinAndHisBongos its not that im being an asshole, im just separating fact from fiction.

[mattakudesu]

@TheMaggotdick i didnt really mean to sound rude, you seem like a reasonable guy. and really, i dont mind religion, i think its kind of cool (some of the mythology and shit) but only when the practictioners dont abandon reason and try to get their irrational and dangerous dogma inserted into world law. that is where i get pissed.

[TheMaggotdick]

@mattakudesu Can you say for sure that religion is a bad joke, can you be 100% certain? Maybe you are, but is it justified?

Just like science, we can never be certain of anything.

Although there is no evidence, in favor or otherwise, of the existence of religion or god, it doesn't mean you can discredit it, although you can choose to.

What I'm saying is that you don't have to put religion and science together, you can't draw any conclusions. Not pissed or anything.