Slashdot Mirror
Scientists Have Detected a New Particle At the Large Hadron Collider At CERN (bbc.com)
New submitter ag144 writes: First time witnessed, the Large Hadron Collider finds predicted double-heavy particle. BBC reports: "Nearly all the matter that we see around us is made of neutrons and protons, which form the centers of atoms. These are made up of three smaller particles called quarks which can be either light or heavy. There are, however, six different types of quarks which combine in different ways to form other kinds of particle. Those that have been detected so far contain at most, one heavy quark. This is the first time that researchers have confirmed the existence of one with two heavy quarks. The research team will now measure the properties of the Xi-cc++ to establish how this new arrangement of quarks behaves and how the strong force holds the system together. They also expect to find more double heavy quark particles. Another unusual property of the particle is that it has two positive charges double that of the proton and it is four times heavier."
I wonder if there's a similar particle with two negative charges, that could be used instead of electrons for a more powerful replacement for electricity, or something. Any EEs that could speculate on the potential (no pun intended) effects of that?
Corruption is convincing someone that the selfless ideal is the same as their selfish ideal.
All of I can think of is how redundant that title is.
I'd suggest: 'New Particle Detected the Large Hadron Collider'
Unless there is a second(third? How many of these things are there?) LHC I haven't heard of and maybe the Janitors or random people off the street are coming in at night to play?
Quarks come in three "generations". The first, lightest generation has down (mass 4.8 MeV) and up (mass 2.4 MeV). The second generation has strange (95 MeV, a heavier version of down) and charm (1275 MeV, a heavier version of up.) The third generation has bottom (4180 MeV, heaver version of down and strange) and top (172440 MeV, heaver version of up and charm.)
When they combine into particles, you either get paired quark+anti-quark (e.g. up+anti-down is a pi+ particle) or a triple of same type: quark+quark+quark or anti-quark+anti-quark+anti-quark. (E.g. a proton is up+up+down.)
This article says the new particle has two charm quarks.
This article says Xi baryons are a class of particles which have a single up or down plus two more massive quarks: either strange, charm or bottom, and Xi baryons have been known since 1952.
From this I conclude that when they say "light" quarks they mean down, up and strange. (I was very frustrated that they didn't say what they meant by "light" quarks.)
Quattuor res in hoc mundo sanctae sunt: libri, liberi, libertas et liberalitas.
I know you guys are excited about all this cool stuff but it won't be long until they cause a triple heavy quark particle to emerge and it's game over. I know you guys like to have fun with the "universe" but you're effectively about to cause a memory rehash which the system can't handle. To be honest, I blame myself for this. I mean, when I was constructing this sim, I skimped on memory thinking that 640 zettaquads ought to be enough for everybody. ;)
Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
The simple things still confound the wise, eh? Maybe if they go far enough they'll find God. You still don't understand me. Priorities????
Forgetting the standard model for a moment (and its ridiculous number of particles and magic forces), imagine that all particles are twisting hoops of dipoles (two massless charged particulates XY form all matter, they're spinning in chains, which close to form hoops). Each conventional particle is 1 wavelength of the hoop twist of this dipole chain, or less commonly two or three wavelengths. When you run this dipole model, you see these double-wave hoops form, but they don't last long, the hoop twists itself in half and splits in two.
You also see charged particles, literally they captured a half dipole (an X+ or Y-) and it's dragged in circles round the inside of the hoop. And yes you see double charges (e.g. X+X+), but again not stable.
It's not the conventional model, it's just a numeric model in a sim, and it requires you lose the concept of mass. (All forces are the dipole organisation force that you see in crystals, water etc. dipoles always organize to form a net attraction. The force between them depends on their twist frequencies subtended onto the other particle, and velocity reduces it, i.e. momentum has nothing to do with 'mass', the velocity reduces the attractive force, there is no mass, and particles have no mass, they're either arranged in a hoop with a large distance across the dipole and thus a large attractive dipole force, or in a cloud with a sum of a very low dipole forces. C is the limit function of the dipole reduction, photons are just clouds of these spinning dipoles)
Oh, one side thing, C is not a global limit of velocity, it's a limit of velocity between two particles. You can arrange, say, 3 particles with initial velocities, so that the middle particle will accelerate past C relative to the first particle, since the force on it is the *sum* of limit functions. Which would mean black holes are not the end point of all matter, and universes, you can accelerate galaxies out to faster than C relative to us.
OK, so it sounds like crazy talk.
Please go on and tell me more about your thousands of particles and special forces that only exist at sub atomic scales....
Who the hell starts a sentence with those words? Illiterate American cretins... what's new.
> If this is real, and stable
Looking at this table, I'd be ready to bet twice my farm on it being less than a [[mumble]]second for some value of [[mumble]] I'd have to look up.
From this I conclude that when they say "light" quarks they mean down, up and strange. (I was very frustrated that they didn't say what they meant by "light" quarks.)
And when they describe a particle as "heavy", they really mean it has extra cheese.
politicians are like babies' nappies: they should both be changed regularly and for the same reasons
They are polluting the matter with many poisoned debris from the colliders.
Don't destroy more!
False alarm. Turns out someone jizzed on the console.
Ah, the "I couldn't hack grad school" crowd.
So the created a brand new particle, previously unknown to the universe? That's impressive.
(For the impaired, this is sarcasm.)
> Another unusual property of the particle is that it has two positive charges double that of the proton and it is four times heavier
I used to work for a network equipment company that developed some of the stuff LHC uses for data storage and distribution, and working on that project directly contributed to R&D for the network equipment. I know of similar examples for RF and superconductor equipment.
Of course it could have been cheaper to pay to develop this equipment directly. But you dramatically emphasized how there are NO benefits, as opposed to saying inefficient ones.
Also CERN is a lot bigger than just the LHC. Work on basic accelerator physics and things like wakefield accelerators has direct applications for medical/industrial accelerators and isotope production.
If this is real, and stable
Real, yes, stable absolutely not! Heavy quarks in bound states decay very rapidly. For example the other well known bound states containing two heavy "quarks" (actually a quark and anti-quark so the headline is technically correct, which of course is the best form of correct) have lifetimes of 7.2e-21s (J/Psi) and 1.2e-20s (upsilon) although a better comparable lifetime would be 2e-13s which is the Lambda_c which contains a single c quark and so, unlike the mesons, has to decay through weak interactions rather than strong interactions which takes longer. With two c-quarks the lifetime should be shorted that the lambda_c but probably not by a lot.
;-). What really makes headlines is the discovery of a new fundamental particle and so far we have had no luck there. This year's data is probably the last which will give a huge increase in reach for new physics. After this year the reach will still improve each year but in increasingly smaller steps since the fractional increase in luminosity becomes less and less as the total size of the dataset grows.
Ultimately, while very worthwhile, this result is unexciting because it is just baryon spectroscopy. In terms perhaps more accessible to Slashdot it would be like Apple releasing the iPhone (n+1) or Samsung releasing a new Galaxy Note (which is perhaps a better analogy because the like the Note the particle disappears with a sudden release of energy after a short, but random, period
However electricity is actual a function of electrons (a leptron called electron neutrino) and they carry a negative charge
No, the electron neutrino is neutral, just like every neutrino. It's the electron which carries the charge. The reason electrons carry charge is because they can move through a conductive material. Apart from being exceedingly unstable this particle will only ever carry electric charge in a plasma because in materials baryons have enormously higher masses and are subject to the strong nuclear force.
The far higher mass and the strong nuclear charge means that they bind together to form nuclei which are so heavy that their bound states are very small (1e-14m) compared to the far lighter electrons which have bound states on the order of 1e-10m. This larger bound state for electrons means that in the right conditions it can overlap with the electron states of other atoms which allows the electrons to move through the material. The nuclear bound states never overlap unless you heat the material to an exceedingly high temperature so they have enough energy to get close enough to each other. This is why fusion reactors require such insanely high temperatures to work.
Is it called the creimeron?
Inside protons and neutrons you could say yes, they're free
It's nowhere near as simple as that. Quarks are subject to asymptotic freedom which means that the higher the energy the less bound they become. However, the size scale you look at is directly related to the energy: the smaller the scale you look at a proton the higher the energy you need. So if you just look at a little below the size of the proton the quarks will still be relatively strongly bound but, as you ramp up the energy, the quarks will become more free...but something stranger also happens.
As the energy ramps up the apparent consistency of the proton changes. The reason for this is that at smaller scales/higher energies there is enough energy that virtual quark pairs and gluons carry some of the energy and momentum of the proton - these are called sea quarks, as opposed to the valence quarks which we typically quote. The result is that by the time you get to LHC energies the quarks are generally only a small part of the proton and most of the proton is just gluons. So the typical model we use for LHC collisions is colliding two bags of gluons - no quarks involved unless the gluon-production channel for whatever you are looking for is heavily suppressed.
they're not 'heavy'. they're big boned. insensitive clod.
I thought what bound the universe together was midicholrians?
So rise up, all ye lost ones, as one, we'll claw the clouds.
Ever see an American woman?
Talk about double heavy!