Testing physics - elementary particles can became other particles?

[Glenn]

(answer is sent to sci.physics )

Some time it occurred to me, that this equation seems not to be sane?
Please explain why it is ok:

d-kvark -> electron + antineutrino + u-kvark

How can the elementary particle d-kvark become/transform into three
other elementary particles?

-

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muon#Muon_decay
Quote: "...
μ− → e− + νe + νμ

μ+ → e+ + νe + νμ
...."

Again can elementary particles can become/transform into three other
elementary particles?

-

What is wrong? Is it a fundamental secret physics prank, that I missed
in college?:

Elementary particle:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elementary_particle
Quote: "...
In particle physics, an elementary particle or fundamental particle is a
particle unknown to have substructure, thus unknown to be composed of
other particles.[1]
[]
Known elementary particles include the fundamental fermions (quarks,
leptons, antiquarks, and antileptons), which generally are "matter
particles" and "antimatter particles", as well as the fundamental bosons
(gauge bosons and Higgs boson), which generally are "force particles".[1]
...."

/Glenn

 

[Bill Sloman]

(answer is sent to sci.physics )

Some time it occurred to me, that this equation seems not to be sane?
Please explain why it is ok:

d-kvark -> electron + antineutrino + u-kvark

How can the elementary particle d-kvark become/transform into three
other elementary particles?

-

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muon#Muon_decay

Quote: "...

μ− → e− + νe + νμ


μ+ → e+ + νe + νμ

..."

Again can elementary particles can become/transform into three other
elementary particles?

-

What is wrong? Is it a fundamental secret physics prank, that I missed
in college?:

Obviously.

Elementary particle:

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

Quote: "...

In particle physics, an elementary particle or fundamental particle is a
particle unknown to have substructure, thus unknown to be composed of
other particles.[1]

[]

Known elementary particles include the fundamental fermions (quarks,
leptons, antiquarks, and antileptons), which generally are "matter
particles" and "antimatter particles", as well as the fundamental bosons
(gauge bosons and Higgs boson), which generally are "force particles".[1]
..."

Since elementary particles can appear - in matched pairs with their anti-particle by "vacuum fluctuation" - it's not hard to see how an elementary particle might transform into three elementary particles when the two extra particels are a particle/anti-particle pair.

If your physics teachers didn't tell you about this, they weren't doing much of a job. I think the idea goes back to Dirac, around 1930

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

where he invented anti-particles to solve a theoretical problem. Once he'd invented the positron, it took two years for somebody to find one.

 

[Clifford Heath]

Known elementary particles include the fundamental fermions (quarks,
leptons, antiquarks, and antileptons), which generally are "matter
particles" and "antimatter particles", as well as the fundamental bosons
(gauge bosons and Higgs boson), which generally are "force particles".[1]
..."

Since elementary particles can appear - in matched pairs with their anti-particle by "vacuum fluctuation" - it's not hard to see how an elementary particle might transform into three elementary particles when the two extra particels are a particle/anti-particle pair.

My high-school physics teacher (who'd just finished a PhD in quantum
physics) use to say:

"In nuclear physics, anything will do anything if you pay it enough"

 

[Phil Hobbs]

Known elementary particles include the fundamental fermions (quarks,
leptons, antiquarks, and antileptons), which generally are "matter
particles" and "antimatter particles", as well as the fundamental bosons
(gauge bosons and Higgs boson), which generally are "force
particles".[1]
..."

Since elementary particles can appear - in matched pairs with their
anti-particle by "vacuum fluctuation" - it's not hard to see how an
elementary particle might transform into three elementary particles
when the two extra particels are a particle/anti-particle pair.

My high-school physics teacher (who'd just finished a PhD in quantum
physics) use to say:

"In nuclear physics, anything will do anything if you pay it enough"

That's the nuclear version of Schawlow's Law: "Anything will lase if you
hit it hard enough."

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal Consultant
ElectroOptical Innovations LLC
Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics

160 North State Road #203
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510 USA
+1 845 480 2058

hobbs at electrooptical dot net
http://electrooptical.net

 

[Glenn]

(answer is sent to sci.physics )

Some time it occurred to me, that this equation seems not to be sane?
Please explain why it is ok:

d-kvark -> electron + antineutrino + u-kvark

How can the elementary particle d-kvark become/transform into three
other elementary particles?

-

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muon#Muon_decay
Quote: "...
μ− → e− + νe + νμ

μ+ → e+ + νe + νμ
..."

Again can elementary particles can become/transform into three other
elementary particles? ....
/Glenn

Hi!

ben6993 could you or others show other models - or the preon model decay
for the muon. Or better yet - a web page with many decay examples?

-

Answers got so far - thanks.

In a preon model,
W- = e- + ν'
W+ = e+ + ν
Higgs = H = W- + W+
W- = du'
W+ = d'u

So if d interacts with H,
d + H -> d + W+ + W-
-> d + d'u + e- + ν'
-> u + e- + ν' (+ annihilated d& d')
The Higgs is the omitted sleeping partner on the LHS which balances the
decay equation.

On 19/08/13 14.42, Odd Bodkin wrote:
....

This happens when it radiates a W boson, right?
I'm pretty sure that just because a particle decays into daughter
particles, this doesn't mean that the daughter particles are contained
inside the parent particle.

On 18/08/13 22.00, Bill Sloman wrote:
....

Since elementary particles can appear - in matched pairs with their

anti-particle by "vacuum fluctuation" - it's not hard to see how an
elementary particle might transform into three elementary particles when
the two extra particels are a particle/anti-particle pair.

If your physics teachers didn't tell you about this, they weren't

doing much of a job. I think the idea goes back to Dirac, around 1930

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

where he invented anti-particles to solve a theoretical problem. Once

he'd invented the positron, it took two years for somebody to find one.
On 18/08/13 22.43, Sam Wormley wrote:
....

In both of your examples, the more massive fundamental particle is
known to be unstable and "decays" into a less massive set of
fundamental particles. I don't have the insight that some others,
say Tom Roberts or PD might bring to the conversation.

http://www.astro.wisc.edu/~heroux/images/Particle_chart.jpg
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_Model
http://www.cpepphysics.org/images/chart_2006_4.jpg

/Glenn

 

[Glenn]

(answer is sent to sci.physics )

On 20/08/13 20.30, Glenn wrote:
....

....

/Glenn

Hi ben6993 and others

How is

-

W- = du'

transformed to or from:

W- = e- + ν'

-

and

W+ = d'u

transformed to or from:

W+ = e+ + ν

?

/Glenn

 

[Glenn]

I don't think it's right to say that the W is either a down quark and an
up quark, or an electron plus a neutrino.
The way I've heard it explained, this is not a breaking into parts or
combining of parts into a whole.

I thought it was, but then someone showed me this table.
http://pdg8.lbl.gov/rpp2013v2/pdgLive/Particle.action?node=S010#decays
Here, there is a particle called a kaon (K^+)
You can see that it decays into
- a positron and an electron neutrino
- a muon and a muon neutrino
- a neutral pion, a positron and an electron neutrino
- a neutral pion, a muon and a muon neutrino
- two neutral pions, a positron and an electron neutrino
- two charged pions, a positron and an electron neutrino
- two charged pions, a muon and a muon neutrino
- three neutral pions, a positron and an electron neutrino
- a charged pion and a neutral pion
- a charged pion and two neutral pions
- three charged pions
- a muon, a muon neutrino, and a photon
- a positron, an electron neutrino and a photon
and about twenty other modes.
So then the question that was asked of me was this: Given the above,
what do you think the kaon is made of?

What was your answer - and what is the right answer?

/Glenn

 

[Glenn]

In a preon model, the elementary particles are not indivisible.
So (say) Z = d d' = u u' = ν ν' = γ γ' = e- e+.
This is a little like the baryon octet symmetries being derived from
different asymmetrical splits of one larger entity. Z can be split as
d + d' but it can also be split differently as u + u' etc.

Likewise, an H can be split as z z' or as W- W+ or as γ γ' γ γ' or as
ν ν' ν ν' or as e- e+ e- e+ etc.

H = W- W+ = (e- + ν') + (e+ + ν) = (e- e+) (ν ν') = Z Z'
H = Z Z' = u u' d d' = (d u') + (d' u) = W- W+

where d u' = e- + ν' = W- and d' u = e+ + ν = W+
To check the line above balances in preon contents, you can see details of the
preons in W- and in the electron, quarks, photon and neutrino in my model in a
Wordpress site at:
Family trees for elementary particles
http://wp.me/p18gTT-W


Muon. If you look at my above web site, in the excel file, you will see that
the muon structure is a page in progress. The preon contents for the muon, in my
model are identical to the preons in e- + Z. And the tauon is e- + H in preon
content.

Thanks, I am puzzled.

Is there any web pages/references that explain the preon model as you did?

/Glenn