Where do particle names come from?
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 9 ก.ย. 2024
- One of the most difficult things in learning particle physics for the first time is to understand all of the various names. There are dozens and dozens and sometimes many names can apply to one particle or a single name can apply to many particles. It’s all very confusing. Luckily, Fermilab’s Dr. Don Lincoln made this video to help you sort it all out.
Particle flow chart:
www.drdiagram.c...
Particle names Venn diagram:
imgur.com/a/BY...
and he summarized whole standard model in 9 minutes that's amazing
yeah i already watched this video and i learned so much from it
..
sorry to be so offtopic but does anybody know a method to get back into an instagram account??
I was dumb forgot the account password. I appreciate any help you can offer me!
@Beckett Zakai I really appreciate your reply. I found the site on google and I'm in the hacking process now.
Seems to take quite some time so I will reply here later with my results.
@Beckett Zakai It did the trick and I now got access to my account again. I am so happy!
Thank you so much, you saved my account :D
Remember when The Enterprise had all their barionic particles removed?
And then there was that time Jack O'Neil called Sam for a crossword answer. The clue was "Up, Down, Top, Bottom, Charm."
Samantha gave the answer, "Strange" to which jack said, "Yes it is."
celestial body - UmaThurman
Nerd here -- he called Daniel, not Sam. And the clue was "Up, down, charmed, [blank]".
(From Lost City, one of the best episodes of the entire series.)
Dear Don, unfortunately, the link to the particle flow chart has become dead. I was very curious to study it. Thank you for the video! As with all good information, I had to stop and study it at some points :-).
Google Images for "preposterousuniverse what particle are you" and you'll have it.
its not dead right now, it links to a scam
i.pinimg.com/736x/a0/db/13/a0db13353e2223731adc8601cdf49e04.jpg
@@kylebowles9820 thank you!!
This is one of my favorite science channels on TH-cam. Thank you for educating us. 👍
The most satisfying thing about my family's summer vacation was hearing that touring Fermi Lab was the highlight of said summer. I truly appreciate the time you and your team put into teaching and inspiring those willing to listen.
I'd love to have a t-shirt w that "particle flow chart" on it.
There's also the psychotron, the particle that makes these ideas stick.
I predict it will be millennia before any are detected in my brain.
And then there's the bozo-on, the particle of which I am chiefly composed.
Great video! This was very educational and also strangely calming to watch. I like that everything is explained well and not too fast. I actually have time to grasp what you're saying before moving on to the next thing.
Omigosh! Two thumbs waaaaay up! I'm an educated layperson who has been reading popular books about quantum physics for years (eg, Sean Carroll, Brian Cox, Jim Al-Khalili, Michael Raymer), but have felt so lost when trying to keep track of all of these little varmint wave/particle critters. I'm going to print out this flow chart now.
Drat, the flow chart is lost!
That's brilliant. I have seen all those names a lot of times, but didn't know that there are strict definitions for hadrons, mesons, leptons and barions. Now it makes perfect sense, especially with explanation of name origin.
I will try to use the flow chart at my home-made-iron man-style-particle accelerator Great video and historical origins always help Thanks
Your chart is awesome
Actually, I would say anyone learning this stuff that chart is just a gestalt of confusion. Sorry Don.
NGC6144
The chart is not by Lincoln, but by the well known astrophysicist Sean Carrol. At least that's what the copyright on the bottom says.
Now I know why Feynman refers to the "mu meson" as such in his lectures, even though now we know a muon is not a meson.
Thanks for posting this. After reading several books and watching a number of TH-cam videos geared to the college-educated, non-physics major layperson (eg, by Brian Cox, Jon Butterworth, and Sean Carroll) I struggled to make charts listing the various particles by feature. The Venn diagram you posted is useful, especially as it explains why some particles are integer and some are not. And I love your latest t-shirt.
Nice description, covering a complex field but compiling it to reasonable size particularly the ven diagram at the end. I will examine that chart you mentioned. I sure like how you concluded "if you know a particle not on this chart, let me be the first to congratulate you on your Nobel prize."
There is a strange charm to this.
I never understood how does whole graviton thing work, I mean isn't gravity a product of spacetime curvature and not an actual force like the other fundamental forces. Yet, at the same time we are looking for a force carrier for gravity like it is just another force with a particle.
I don't get it...
Well gravity as you said is a product of a curvature of spacetime but it doesn't mean it magically happen it need something to carry this force wich is what we call graviton and hasn't been discovered yet.
Gravity isn't instantly, it's not faster than the speed of light and so it's "just" another fundamental force like electromagnetism wich need photons to work.
At least it's all I know on the subject (btw not all scientists agree that graviton exist so who now? I believe it does but that's not a confirmed fact ^^)
I've been down this road and you will hear explanations from both sides: Gravity as an emergent property(space-time curvature via mass) and gravity as a fundamental force-spin 2 graviton. Don't let it get to you. It hasn't been settled yet plus, Dr. Lincoln said he thinks it won't be for millennia until we confirm the graviton.
All you need to do is look at how spacetime curvature is expressed in einstein field equations of general relativity. It is a tensor field viewed from particular reference frame - the field describes how trajectories of particles in constant motion will appear warped from your point of view. By comparison, electromagnetic field is a vector field viewed from particular reference frame - it also describes how trajectories of (charged) particles in constant motion will appear warped from your point of view. They both describe some sort of break in symmetry of motion - deviations from Newton's 1st law - that is pretty much a definition of a force - something that causes particles to not move in straight lines at constant speed.
Changes in electromagnetic field are propagated by electromagnetic waves and from quantum mechanics we know these waves are quantized into bosons called photons. Changes in curvature of spacetime are also propagated by gravitational waves. So we suspect that they too are quantized into bosons called gravitons, just like all other fields.
NGC6144 that settles it, we need a video on the subject
You have to understand that all scientific theories are just models that do a very good job at making predictions. In other words, when we try to model the behaviours of large objects due to gravity, Einstein's theory of general relativity currently does the best job. This theory explains gravity as a curvature in spacetime, as you said. However, even if it explains gravity very well at large scales, the language we use to describe the inner workings of the theory might not necessarily reflect the true nature of gravity - in fact, one might never know what the true nature of any physical phenomenon is.
Nevertheless, we can make a lot of theories that do a damn good job at making predictions, and one that does its best job at explaining how objects work at an extremely small scale is quantum mechanics. So far, all of the other forces can be thought of in quantum mechanics as consisting of force-carrying particles, so called force carries, that are transmitted between other particles such as electrons and protons. In short, it would seem a little odd then if interactions due to gravity between particles are the only interactions that cannot be described by force carriers. This is why scientist hypothesise the existence of gravitons, which are the force carriers of gravity.
Physics is everything but engineers build everything. This topic is one of the more confusing aspects of particle science. Thanx Don.
I'm most mistrusting of how intuitive I found following along with this particle menagerie. Notwithstanding its useful presentation. A circumspection borne of prior misstep you see. Bravo!
Yes, that was REALLY helpful, especially your Venn diagram and flow chart. I think I understood a lot of the terminology already, but this explanation really helped organise (and thus readily remember) the various classes and particular particles. Thank you so much Don, for such a clear exposition. I am not a professional, but an enthusiastic amateur physicist. Please keep making these helpful and entertaining videos!
For those wanting to see the chart, it has a url at the bottom, if you manage to pause at 9:02 when Don steps right you can see it.
preposterousuniverse dot com. Google Images for "preposterousuniverse what particle are you" and you'll have it.
The music is the one and only drawback of this video. Enjoyable content.
You know, I’ve actually wondered for many, many years but never looked up how the names of particles came to be. Physics is over my head though I like listening and learning about it but I can’t explain any concepts to my wife who couldn’t care less, lol. BTW, for 20 years I used to live on the north side of Chicago and I remember frequently driving past Fermilab on the freeway. Regrettably, I wish I had gone through Fermilab’s self-guided tour. Thank you for this video!
There's a lot of interesting history behind names. A couple of favorites of mine: the original word to describe the cross sectional area of a neutron that represents its ability to be captured by a nucleus is the Barn. It came from the (Los Alamos, I believe) physicists saying that it was like throwing a baseball at a barn from some distance away and what the probability was that you would hit it. Another is the time that it takes, once a neutron has been captured by a radioactive nucleus like uranium, to decay which is measured in a unit called a Shake. The physicists appreciated just how rapidly that happens and one commented that it was faster than two shakes of a lamb's tail.
I'm gonna have to watch this a few more times. Does help make particle physics references more understandable.
You just collapsed my wavefunction of misunderstanding by shedding light on the subject so I could observe it!!! :-)
*_...also, I ponder that quark fermions may be higher order composited electron fermions, in both concept (cf electron-positron mutual-annihilation to gamma rays and rarer neutrinos, with their half-&-half-definition of anti) and in practicality (cf a quarked Z-particle decay to an electron-positron pair; or cf a deuteron is or-not a proton-sharing-a-neutron-electron)..._*
Fun video, a bit lighter weight that your usual stuff. The historical description was nice and really did help explain some of the weirdness in the current nomenclature.
Enjoying the Fermi videos.
Why do we mix elementary particle and composite particles together?
I suspect it is because we sometimes need to look at particles functionally - and some elementary particles (electron) and some composite particles (proton) are important at the functional level (chemistry etc).
because it is not obvious which ones are which, from experimental point of view. They are classified by the properties they exhibit, not composition.
Bei Zhang Earlier on it wasn't known that composite particles were made up of smaller constituents and were originally thought to be fundamental. As the video showed Gell-Mann and Zweig both theorized Quarks(Aces) in the mid 1960s to better explain Hadrons(Protons, Neutrons, Mesons).
KohuGaly That's a mistake that should be corrected, then. It just makes the terminology more cluttered and cumbersome. Properties follow from the composition. It's the same thing with the difference between celestial bodies - stars, brown dwarfs, gas giants, ice giants, terrestrial planets, dwarf planets and so forth, which all more or less result from the same process with only mass distinguishing them, yet we keep inventing all these categories to put them in. At least in that astronomy case there isn't the same degree of overlap between categories... but it's still pretty bad and unnecessary.
I mean mixing them in our Venn diagram. At least it should be mentioned in the video.
That was very helpful, explained quite allot. Had to read a bit more on Mesons to figure it out, however best video on classifying particles yet.
Great video. Loved the chart!
Hey @Fermilab, the Link to your Particle flow chart does not work anymore, can you please reupload it? :)
That intro was so badass, I was expecting a collision or something. BTW, link to the flow chart is not working anymore
Fantastic, that makes everything much more organized in my mind, thanks.
If possible start a tutorial course on particle physics on UDEMY platform. I'm sure that will Kindle interest in particle and quantum physics in children. Lots of pupil around globe miss the true taste of physics due to boring dull teaching environment. This will a a revolutionary way to light up the scientist in new generation
Should the graviton exist at all? I thought gravity was no longer considered a force but simply the bending of space /time by matter.
THANK YOU PROFESSOR LINCOLN...!!!
I did not understand a thing but I enjoyed it all the same.
Seriously!
The reason they probably didn't make sense is because this is the first time you're hearing about a lot of those names. Others of us, have heard the names before but were confused about how they related to each other, so this video was meant to clear up that confusion. You would probably need a different video to explain what those particles actually did individually.
Think of the various particles as IKEA furniture parts and sub assemblies of that larger cabinet or semi-portable sliding glass closet unit. The funny wrench thingy would be one of the better super colliders.
I’m with you Robert it made no sense but was great to learn, let the patronising comments wash over you and enjoy the moment, boffins gonna boff and patronisers gonna look rude.....😉
I shared the chart on my FB page so that it can be enjoyed by all.
This is cool, i understood almost everything. Thanks Dr. Lincoln
if it wasn't for our cranium, our thought waves would escape and face detection and immediate loss by the action of those same thought waves, in part particularly particular to particles.
Great explanation, thank you!
Great job. FYI, showing the Nobel prize is more related to Oslo than Stockholm, is it not?
Can you please explain spin of a particle especially of electron..?
There is hell lot of illogical explaination of spins here in India.
Spin is just a property of particles that has the units of angular momentum; nothing is actually spinning. This book might help: www.goodreads.com/book/show/1349918.The_Story_of_Spin
Dr. Lincoln: Please make a video about the meson theory of nuclear forces!
Thanks for your work!
I'm at 3:02 and came up with a question!
Why everybody chooses Greek words for names? It makes thing more complicated. Very few people actually knows Greek. English name would be awesome and much simplified just like "Black Hole" would be something like "Mávri trýpa" in Greek (translated with Google, and I don't know if it's correct).
So, it's wrong to name things in Greek if they speak English!
But what about generations?
i find how the workings of color charge on quarks curious.... like in electromagnetism, one particle is associated with a fixed electric charge... but color charge seems to be interchangeable between particles, in fermilab explanations
Nice! Thanks for your clarification.great video
Thx, great video. The link to the flow chart seems to be broken.
What is the difference in properties between neutrinos and antineutrinos?
Lol I already knew all this. Whtat I'm curious about, however, is why there are six types of particles in each category. Couldn't there have been more? Or less?
Outstanding and very helpful!
Great article on the Higgs decay, BTW.
Could graviton be the dark matter we looking for? They are not detectable because they are absorbed by space (thus bending or warping them?)
So does that mean a USB plug is a Lepton? How many times have you attempted to insert a USB plug into a socket, failed, spun it around, failed and spun it around again before it fits into the socket?
Thanks! M.Lincoln
Always love your shirts Don. Where do you get them?
fellow viewers, particle flow diagram can be found alternatively via google search
Which book i should read to know about sub atomic particles
It's really funny how he pronounced Satyandranath Bose. BTW, love from India.
0:24 “…lepton and on and on andon…” Right-on…✊
Please fix the link to the flow chart, thanks.
Doc u r fab ! My grandkids r going to college in Chicago ! Love every one of your videos! Keep them coming !
ScienceNinjaDude we will great idea ! Thanks Ninja dude !
what about charm and strange?
What is the name of the soundtrack? It's so uplifting!!!
*_...specifically odd,-half spins..._*
what next big thing fermilab facility is going to explain, discover?
The measurement of the anomalous magnetic dipole moment of the muon in the g2 experiment.
What Frank said
In the parallel existence classification system, one that would accept this particular arrangement of phase-states locked into their relative stability by the Quantum Operators of the Quantum Fields Modulation Mechanism, which is basically a "order from the turbulent quality of chaos" self-defining schema, is the clocking-measured principle of QM-Time.
"Discrete" dimensional and numerical classification are empirically evolved in "local" quantization by a reflected subjective principle, the AM-FModuli / aspects of the Universal wave-package, image modules of connection.., embedded interference vortices of QM-Timing. At the level of direct experience.
awesome video thank you. Can you do one over an update of dark energy and its relation to thermodynamics?
Michael
Dark energy primarily means that the universe is expanding. This means that the universe it not static. This means that the symmetry according to the Noether theorem upon which 1st law of thermodynamics is based is not strictly existing, which means the 1st law is no longer completely true. At least on very large scales. This doesn't mean that you can create your perpetual.motion machine, but it means that due to the expansion of the universe energy can vanish (on galactic scales), so that the 1st law is no longer completely true (same as with the second law, which is also not always true, but it's just extremely likely that it is not violated)
Oh yes, you can also create energy out of nothing .. at least if you find a way to make the universe shrink instead of expand and if you build a machine that's the size of several billion lightyears
Wow, thanks. It made sense a little bit.
particle flow chart is not there. Someone didn't pay web site bill?
Could you share the Venn diagram with all the different particles listed in it as well?
If you have a smartphone, you can use a screen shot.
i.imgur.com/OD5aFy6.png
We've added a link to the Venn diagram graphic in the video description. Here's the link: imgur.com/a/BY3SQqQ
The flow chart link does not work any more...
Great Video ...👍👍👍
Is it forces field?felt?
@4.41 proud of India ♥️
What about the partyon?
How about charm and strange? Quarks have weird names
Broken link, if you are looking for a copy Google image "what particle are you" or
www.preposterousuniverse.com/blog/2012/04/25/what-particle-are-you/
Great vids !
1:22 Why isn’t “the fundamental unit of spin” a half-unit instead? What special about the particles with _even_ numbers of half-units? 🤓🤔🤷♂️
Thanks; I’m going to have to watch this a couple more times...
Where does the positron fit into the modern classification scheme?
ScienceNinjaDude, so then, I gather you’re saying that this classification does not distinguish between any elementary particle and its anti-particle? That is, particle/anti-particle duality is a further distinction ignored here.
As is chirality.
How is it that a Quark and anti-quark can interact to form a, more or less, stable particle with out annihilating each other?
This video is good, but the first sentence is perplexing. 0:11 "One of the most confusing things about learning basic particle physics is mastering all of the particle names." Really? There's like thirty vocab terms there, tops. That's the most confusing things about basic _particle physics?_
The second is occurs when you have to to start reading obscure Russian papers that have never been translated :-(
Sadly the diagram is no more as the website is dead.
Confirmed.
Why do you think it would be millennia before the gravitation is discovered? And considering the track record of such predictions why would you make one?
Thought Boson was named after the way a boatswain is pronounced.
Quarks left off the lower right fermion circle in the Venn diagram because KISS?
Wino in the list in case supersymmetry confirmed during the video's lifetime? (no snark intended)
Bose - not to be confused with the other Bose that created the crystal radio (also from India). None of the two to be confused with the audio equipment company that makes sound seem good but ... meh ... isn't.
err uhh. so what do the various particles do?
Now can we have a video on what the heck is quantum “spin”?? The one thing I’m pretty sure it isn’t is spin.
It's a quantum number (usually s), just like n, m and l. Every "classical" explanation is inherently flawed. So best take it as what it is: a property of quantum objects that can take on certain values.
Frank Schneider yep, that’s how I take it. A property I can’t understand that takes on some value... but I think a video to illuminate the topic would be great. Unless there’s nothing more to say
Don't forget Uli's goodbye cake. 2:30 PM.
thank you
can you tell me the physical significance of spin of the particles sir ?
Looks like no one else will answer you. I'll try.
Here’s a simplified explanation, as simple as I can make it anyway.
Spin specifies how far one rotation of a probability wave takes it towards the exact same state again (a state being its quantum phase in a complex plane). You can think of a probability wave as being a point particle if you like, just don’t think of it as physically spinning.
½ spin (fermions) means one rotation takes it only half way back to the exact same exact state (one rotation takes to an opposite state rather than to the same state, it needs to go around again to get back to the same state, a sign flips with each turn that changes the interference pattern).
1 spin (vector bosons) means one rotation takes it the whole way (simpler waves, no sign change).
2 spin (graviton) means one rotation takes it through the same state twice (related to it being a tensor rather than a vector).
0 spin (Higgs boson) means it is a scalar and looks the same no matter how it is rotated.
Composite particles can have these and other spin numbers.
Spin itself is an intrinsic quantum property of a particle making it resemble a magnet in the sense that the particle would be deflected if it was placed in magnetic field. A spin number is the number of fundamental units of angular momentum where each unit is h/2pi.
www.scientificamerican.com/article/what-exactly-is-the-spin/
The link of the chart doesn't work.
talks about particle physics
1:00 casually shows someone smoking
Can you do a video explaining everything that always on the blackboard?
so where do particles come from?
It looks like the link to the flow chart doesn't work anymore.
I double checked with proxy servers and everything, the link's dead. The way back machine didn't even archive it.
Did i see wino on that list?