Unfortunately, those cute little leptoquarks are currently out of stock! 😉
Leptoquark | The Particle Zoo
Fear not, Mes Amis. Clouseau is on the case:
Arrests are imminent. You don't mess with the Cop Quark. 😀
Arrests are imminent. You don't mess with the Cop Quark. 😀
What's not to understand about rare B-meson decays? 🙄
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct...-decay-m.pdf&usg=AOvVaw24rFbk8A9ra64p-J3Z7ICi
But, "penguin decays"????
What's that all about! 😕
I can only tell you what I know.
Anything to do with Penguins suggests Debian Linux to me.
Debian -- The Universal Operating System
People always laughed at Linux. But it's always worked for me. Very secure.
Anything to do with Penguins suggests Debian Linux to me.
Debian -- The Universal Operating System
People always laughed at Linux. But it's always worked for me. Very secure.
Forget linux. Penguin decays are involved in CP violation:
March of the Penguins | Berkeley Lab
So that is what the fuss is about. It does look like new physics. 🙂
Cern experiment hints at new force of nature | Large Hadron Collider | The Guardian
March of the Penguins | Berkeley Lab
So that is what the fuss is about. It does look like new physics. 🙂
Cern experiment hints at new force of nature | Large Hadron Collider | The Guardian
I’m not all that interested in particles. They are there. So what.
I’m interested in time, gravity and entropy.
Just sayin’
🙂
I’m interested in time, gravity and entropy.
Just sayin’
🙂
Well, doesn't that take the biscuit! 😀
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
Is a Big Crunch likely if the nuclear reactions of all the suns convert much of their mass into energy? Seems like collective mass is being eliminated, and there's less of it to have a gravity retraction effect on the universe's expansion.
If all matter doesn't break down in this solar process, do some elementary particles, such as gravitons, migrate to some of the theoretical dimensions? (So the mass is conserved, but not destroyed, and is it likely the overall breakdown process could transition it "there"?)
If all matter doesn't break down in this solar process, do some elementary particles, such as gravitons, migrate to some of the theoretical dimensions? (So the mass is conserved, but not destroyed, and is it likely the overall breakdown process could transition it "there"?)
Normal matter - everything we can observe or detect with our instruments - adds up to less than 5% of the total mass of the universe.
It really shouldn't be called "normal matter" at all since it constitutes such a small fraction of the universe.
So, normal matter would not appear to be present in sufficient quantity to greatly influence the universe's expansion or to bring about a "Big Crunch".
For the same reason, your hypothesised migration of elementary particles to theoretical other dimensions is unlikely to be a big player in the rate of expansion of the universe.
The real mystery we are presently confronting is why the universe appears to be expanding at an ever faster rate - any ideas?
Entropy creates time. Time and distance are one and the same thing. Ergo we see an expanding universe because time is cumulatively increasing.
Up until Einstein there was a reluctance (maybe lack of awareness is a better term) to understand time as anything but a fixed meter or backdrop (or canvas - your term 😉 )upon which everything took place. Einstein showed that it was in fact quite elastic - it changed depending on the velocity of the observer or in the presence of a gravitational field.
Maybe it’s nothing like we think it is. Would time exist as we know it without entropy?
Now, of course you will laugh at me Galu, and so you should. I don’t have the equations to back up my meanderings. But then again, some profoundly gifted individuals think there are special ‘particles’ driving the expansion of the universe and other ones responsible for gravity.
We are no wiser.
🙂
Up until Einstein there was a reluctance (maybe lack of awareness is a better term) to understand time as anything but a fixed meter or backdrop (or canvas - your term 😉 )upon which everything took place. Einstein showed that it was in fact quite elastic - it changed depending on the velocity of the observer or in the presence of a gravitational field.
Maybe it’s nothing like we think it is. Would time exist as we know it without entropy?
Now, of course you will laugh at me Galu, and so you should. I don’t have the equations to back up my meanderings. But then again, some profoundly gifted individuals think there are special ‘particles’ driving the expansion of the universe and other ones responsible for gravity.
We are no wiser.
🙂
I believe that the idea of time and distance being the same thing stems from the 'natural unit system' of atomic physics where the speed of light, c, is a natural unit of speed and can be given the value 1.
Natural units - Wikipedia)
Instead of measuring distance in metres and time in seconds, we could measure distance in lightseconds and time in seconds so that the speed of light now becomes 1 lightsecond/second.
Therefore, if we look at the equation distance = c x time, when c is made equal to 1, distance becomes equal to time - it's all to do with our choice of units! 😎
So how does space enter the picture? That "thing" that contains all matter, detectable or not. When we say "universe", is it the sum of all "things"? Does it include "space" as one of those "things"? Is this expansion the ever increasing distance of "things" from each other?
It's the "space" as a "thing" which is also expanding that I can't get my head around. It's the "container" without matter. So how can it expand without building blocks?
You cannot have ‘space’ ie distance or as just mentioned by Galu, time, between any objects unless you have had some energy expended which results in increased entropy. That’s exactly what happened since the Big Bang. You had almost infinite energy density, and through entropy, time (distance) was created and the result was an expanding universe that cooled in the process. Time and entropy seem to be linked at a very fundamental level, and ultimately it may that even the curvature of space time actually arises from entropy- this is what Erik Verlinde is hypothesising - and as a result we get the emergent property of gravity.
Distance and time are interchangeable in this view.
If you move any two objects apart, or change their frame of reference wrt each other, you have to expend energy. So, the hypothesis is that it’s entropy driving the arrow of time at a cosmological level and we see that, as humans, as an expanding universe.
So space is the evidence of entropy? So it's just incidental? So the Big Bang arose from a singularity? Nothingness?
The theory of relativity tells us that the three dimensions of space combine with time to form a four-dimensional geometry called spacetime.
It is difficult to understand the concept of spacetime because our normal, three dimensional Euclidian geometry does not apply. Instead we have to apply Riemannian geometry in which time is regarded as a spacetime distance.
The Observational Approach to Cosmology
When we say that 'space' is expanding, we really mean that 'spacetime' is expanding and that's not explainable in terms of people's everyday experience of time, distance and geometry.
It sucks, but that is just the way it is for us normal folks!
Okay well, here I am in the present, sitting still looking up at my clock in front of my laptop. What do you call this "area" my body is taking up? An event? 
A singularity is not nothing. The one that was responsible for the Big Bang was near enough infinite energy and mass. We can only speculate why it went ka-boom! No one really knows although like most things in physics, there are a thousand and one theories.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.