new particle - is physics wrong?

Watch
This discussion is closed.
elpaw
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 16 years ago
#1
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/3277579.stm
0
not1
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#2
Report 16 years ago
#2
or, more to the point, is physics ever 'right'?
theories always change eventually in light of new evidence. im sure theyll squeeze it into existing theories somehow.
0
king of swords
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#3
Report 16 years ago
#3
Well I'd say that the rules of physics are made around what we know (ie. discovered practically), so the idea of sub-atomic particles will be adapted to fit this one in like the theory of the atom was changed from plum pudding to a nucleus with electrons orbiting around.
0
Ralfskini
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#4
Report 16 years ago
#4
This is interesting. Have you heard of the Higgs Boson?- it's another weird particle with some strange properties (something to do with mass) but I can't remember exactly.
0
elpaw
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#5
Report Thread starter 16 years ago
#5
(Original post by king of swords)
Well I'd say that the rules of physics are made around what we know (ie. discovered practically), so the idea of sub-atomic particles will be adapted to fit this one in like the theory of the atom was changed from plum pudding to a nucleus with electrons orbiting around.
yes, they've already started conjecturing that it is two quarks and two antiquarks, but that would require that there is another colour involved, but somehow they have already fit this into the theory
0
king of swords
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#6
Report 16 years ago
#6
(Original post by Ralfskini)
This is interesting. Have you heard of the Higgs Boson?- it's another weird particle with some strange properties (something to do with mass) but I can't remember exactly.
Isn't that supposed to be the particle that HASN'T been discovered which is required for mass to exist???
0
elpaw
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#7
Report Thread starter 16 years ago
#7
(Original post by king of swords)
Isn't that supposed to be the particle that HASN'T been discovered which is required for mass to exist???
it isnt required for mass to exist, but would go a long way to quantising gravity
0
Ralfskini
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#8
Report 16 years ago
#8
(Original post by king of swords)
Isn't that supposed to be the particle that HASN'T been discovered which is required for mass to exist???
Well they have detected it a few times, but thats the one. New Scientist! Always a classic!
0
king of swords
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#9
Report 16 years ago
#9
(Original post by elpaw)
it isnt required for mass to exist, but would go a long way to quantising gravity
ah, thank u .
0
acidbubble
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#10
Report 16 years ago
#10
imo this is great news, it helps show that physics is alive and there are plenty of discoveries for ppl still to find out

i am hoping to discover some thing big one day...hmm maybe the ultimate theory of everything.
0
elpaw
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#11
Report Thread starter 16 years ago
#11
(Original post by keithy)
imo this is great news, it helps show that physics is alive and there are plenty of discoveries for ppl still to find out

i am hoping to discover some thing big one day...hmm maybe the ultimate theory of everything.
not if someone else beats you to it *pointing the finger at maskall*
0
Camford
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#12
Report 16 years ago
#12
Can we smash computers in the atomic smasher? Would it create new types of harddrive or graphics card or whatever? That'll be interesting wouldn't it?

Pretty much nothing is ever proved outside maths. Because we are in the universe, theories will always be theories and never be can they be called the universal truth.
0
lil_brucie
Badges: 0
#13
Report 16 years ago
#13
i know, i always have a few tricks up my sleeve!!!!

I WILL BE THE BEST PHYSICIST EVER.

SEE YOU AT OXFORD IN LESS THAN 2 YEAR TIME ELPAW.
0
Camford
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#14
Report 16 years ago
#14
(Original post by lil_brucie)
i know, i always have a few tricks up my sleeve!!!!

I WILL BE THE BEST PHYSICIST EVER.

SEE YOU AT OXFORD IN LESS THAN 2 YEAR TIME ELPAW.
NO, go to cambridge.
0
elpaw
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#15
Report Thread starter 16 years ago
#15
(Original post by Camford)
NO, go to cambridge.
don't go to cambridge, don't do *ugh* physical science* ught don't do maths and chemistry, come to oxford
0
X
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Had lockdown impacted your relationships?

Yes, my partner and I are struggling (15)
7.54%
Yes, my partner and I broke up (14)
7.04%
Yes, it's hard being around my family so much (43)
21.61%
Yes, I'm feeling lonely isolating alone (24)
12.06%
No, nothing has changed (67)
33.67%
No, it's helped improve my relationships (36)
18.09%

Watched Threads

View All