----> ---- ---- ---- ----
English ----> Español ---- Deutsch ---- Français ---- Italiano ---- Português ... If translation leaves the bottom of a page still English, copy and translate HERE.

Standard Model physics theories

Homepage . Albert Einstein . Isaac Newton . Rene Descartes . William Gilbert ....... String Theory ........ General Image Theory

- Site Search at bottom v -

In current physics 'The Standard Model' theory might maybe better be called 'The Undefined Model' theory. And two basic versions of the Standard Model theory are current, a particle version with forces involving particle exchange and a field energy version where the particles are energy or field quanta. But its particles have poorly defined 'charges' including 'colour-charges' and other aspects that do not seem to fit the Descartes (only size, shape and motion) particle definition, and its energy or field quanta seem to be poorly defined energies of nothing or fields of nothing based on waves of nothing ?

Standard Model / Models theory.

In current Standard Model theory, fermion particles involve 1 stable family pair of Quarks with 1 stable family pair of Leptons (electrons, muons and taons) plus 2 unstable family pairs of Quarks with 2 unstable family pairs of Leptons. An additional 7 boson 'particles' are also postulated, including the massless Photon and Gluon 'particles'.

Particle ............ Mass Equivalents, GeV

Fermions :
up quark ............... 0.005000000
down quark .......... 0.009000000
electron ................ 0.000510000
electron neutrino .. 0.000000007

charm quark ......... 1.350000000
strange quark ....... 0.175000000
muon .................... 0.106000000
muon neutrino ...... 0.000270000

top quark ......... 174.000000000
bottom quark ....... 4.500000000
tau ....................... 1.780000000
tau neutrino ......... 0.030000000

Bosons :
photon .................0.000000000
W+ .................... 60.200000000
W- ......................80.200000000
Z ........................91.200000000
gluon (x8) ............ 0.000000000
higgs ............... 500.000000000
graviton ............... 0.000000000

The gluon is claimed to have 8 colour-charge types being forms of red + blue + antired + antiblue, or red + green + antired + antigreen, or blue + green + antiblue + antigreen. And quarks are claimed to combine to form neutrons and protons which are termed hadrons.

Fermions are claimed to have half-integer 'spin' and obey Fermi-Dirac behaviour in being unable to exist in the same quantum state or space. They basically are Descartes push-particles.

Bosons are claimed to have integer 'spin' and obey Bose-Einstein behaviour in that multiple identical bosons can occupy the same quantum state or space. They basically are more like energy wave packets than like classical particles. While some bosons are claimed to have 'mass' other are claimed to not, and some bosons like photons are readily detected but others seem impossible to detect.

Bosons are generally problematic in standard model physics, as is its explanation of at-a-distance-forces as being due to 'virtual boson' exchange. Protons and Electrons are claimed to electrically attract eachother by Virtual Photon exchange in an Electrical Interaction force, and Protons and Neutrons composed of Quarks are claimed to internally bond by Virtual Gluon exchange attraction in a Strong Interaction force that increases with distance unlike other forces. Protons and Electrons are also claimed to weakly attract eachother by Virtual W and Z boson exchange in an Electroweak Interaction force. Mass particles are claimed to gravitationally attract eachother by Virtual Graviton exchange in a Gravitational Interaction force.

These virtual particle exchanges are said to be unobservables. Of course normal particle exchange in a Descartes particle physics might seem a reasonable recoil explanation for a universal repulsion force if there was any such, but is trickier for the attractive forces and for the selectivity of forces actually shown by nature. Of course simple particle contact collisions could look similar to repulsions. Virtual particle exchange may seem to need some attraction mechanism as well as a signal mechanism for prompting exchanges. Forces cannot be directly shown to be due to 'force-carrying particles', since eg a photon beam does not produce electric attraction and a static electricity charged object does not produce a photon beam. And of course photons show a wide range of variation that ecectric charge does not show.

Standard Model physics uses Feynman diagrams, where only lines entering or leaving a diagram represent observable particles. Below two electrons enter an interaction, exchanging unobservable virtual photons, and then exit ;

Fermion 'particles' are all claimed by some to have 'anti-particles' of similar mass but opposite charge that can form 'anti-matter'. A particle and its anti-particle are said to undergo 'annihilation interactions' by both converting to photons. Strangely little anti-matter seems to exist, but there are more reasonable claims that much 'dark matter' exists maybe composed mostly of non-atomic neutrinos. Claims of 'dark energy' are trickier, as noted in our Gravity section.

There are four fundamental forces in Standard Model physics, the activities of which are generally defined as being ;

Gravitational force, acting on particles termed mass particles.
Electromagnetic force, acting on particles termed charged particles.
Strong force, acting on particles termed colored particles.
Weak force, acting on particles termed left-handed particles.

This might perhaps be better redefined, explaining particle properties and better for a signal physics, as ;

Particles that respond to Gravitional force signals are termed mass particles.
Particles that respond to Electromagnetic force signals are termed charged particles.
Particles that respond to Strong force signals are termed coloured particles.
Particles that respond to Weak force signals are termed left-handed particles.

Of course signal-response systems have been built that produce several responses to one signal, or produce different responses to different signals. So the above are not the only possible definitions of forces and/or of 'particles', and several sets of such definitions might well allow of the same force response event mathematics.

There is strong evidence that forces seem to become very digital at close distances, so sub-atomic particle bindings/ energies/ masses/ lifetimes all seem to involve very narrow and possibly specific mass/energy levels. This contrasts greatly with the apparent gradation of force effects in the universe at macroscopic levels. It is not clear if this applies to only some forces like the strong force, or to all forces including whatever collision force is. So it is not clear what the real general explanation is, or if there is one general real explanation involved or maybe more than one. It is not clear if sub-atomic force evidence favours some one general physics theory or may fit with some several general physics theories if appropriately specified.

There have been some perhaps poorly defined claims that at very close distances these forces may be the same strength and effectively be just one force, and claims that these forces may be all due to the sending of some 'Messenger Particles' or 'Force Photons' back and forth. Of course many physicists support Einstein's view that gravitational force differs fundamentally from the other forces.

You can listen to some interesting recent lectures by some physicists on related experiments and some interpretations of them, at VIA.

Of course some physicists now support contradiction-allowed duality physics where the 'elementary particles' both are 'wave packets' and are 'not-wave particles'. Others prefer to go with only one of these alternatives. One option involving no contradiction might be taking 'elementary particles' as being multi-particle 'vibratons' composed of many standard particles allowing standard wave motion among their parts ?

Standard Model physics is mostly used by those employed in particle physics, often along with some version of Quantum Mechanics. But particle physics experiment is now often statistical experiment physics, and the real physics often boils down to statistical significance interpretation - and most physicists are poor statisticians. Modern physics 'experiment' often has the same basic statistics weakness as much modern medical 'experiment'. Standard Model theories perhaps realistically represent more a promising physics awaiting a properly defined theory ?

IF you like this site then

OR maybe make a small donation ; (it will help with site development, and just possibly with some experiments long planned but never afforded.)

You can do a good search of this website, or of the web, below ;

Custom Search

Or you may want to learn or relearn How to kiss, how to date, love and marriage.

otherwise, if you have any view or suggestion on the content of this site, please contact :- New Science Theory
Vincent Wilmot 166 Freeman Street Grimsby Lincolnshire DN32 7AT.

You are welcome to link to any page on this site, eg http://www.new-science-theory.com/william-gilbert.html