Quarks

by **Anisa** on Tue Apr 13, 2010 2:29 pm ([msg=38204]see Quarks[/msg])

Are there any particles smaller than quarks inside quarks?
What do you think?

by **Goatboy** on Tue Apr 13, 2010 2:42 pm ([msg=38206]see Re: Quarks[/msg])

Baby quarks? Midget quarks? Or to be more politically correct, "Developmentally-challenged quarks"

I don't know, really. Physics is one of those subjects that I'm interested in, but haven't studied to much extent. I know enough to be satisfied, and to where I could learn more if I wanted.

From my own understanding, it's entirely possible. For the longest time, we thought atoms were the smallest particles. Then there were protons, neutrons and electrons. Now it's quarks.

Disclaimer: The ideas expressed in this post are not complete in any way, and therefore should not be taken as such. I have intentionally left out portions for the sake of brevity.

by **Defience** on Tue Apr 13, 2010 2:42 pm ([msg=38208]see Re: Quarks[/msg])

No one really knows but you might be quarking up the wrong tree.....

by **Goatboy** on Tue Apr 13, 2010 2:43 pm ([msg=38209]see Re: Quarks[/msg])

Defience wrote:No one really knows but you might be quarking up the wrong tree.....

... No. Bad Defience! No lame jokes! That's my job!

by **Defience** on Tue Apr 13, 2010 2:59 pm ([msg=38212]see Re: Quarks[/msg])

/me keeps his day job

by **Vulpine** on Tue Apr 13, 2010 3:02 pm ([msg=38213]see Re: Quarks[/msg])

Since quarks are fundamental particles, they aren't comprised of anything else. To our current level of understanding, at least. However, there are particles that have much smaller cross-sections. Electrons and neutrinos, for example.

by **sanddbox** on Tue Apr 13, 2010 7:15 pm ([msg=38220]see Re: Quarks[/msg])

I haven't heard enough on the subject to really be an authority on it. Common sense would tell me that quarks are made up of something else, but it's not out of the realm of possibility that quarks are literally the smallest we can break size down into.

Here's a mindfuck: What's the smallest unit of time?

by **Goatboy** on Wed Apr 14, 2010 12:37 am ([msg=38237]see Re: Quarks[/msg])

sanddbox wrote:Here's a mindfuck: What's the smallest unit of time?

The time it takes you to climax?

OH SNAP!

by **neuromanta** on Wed Apr 14, 2010 1:44 am ([msg=38242]see Re: Quarks[/msg])

Judging from the experience, that atoms were considered indivisable, and then when they divided it, they said that nucleons (neutron, electron, proton, etc.) were indivisable, but that was proven false too... we can say that it has a fairly good chance that phisicists will be able to divide quarks too. On the other hand, quarks are made of pure energy... I don't know if it is possible to tear up energy into pieces...

Anisa wrote:Are there any particles smaller than quarks inside quarks?
What do you think?

They've actually discovered hundreds of individual smaller particles insides the building blocks of atoms that are unique and don't actually exist. Last I read about this was a book titled "In Search of Schrodinger's Cat" It made tons of sense then turned my brain upside down and made me question what I actually thought I knew. All I can comprehend now is the absence or excess of energy at some unknown level that isn't entirely real.

Really it's perspective and not the size of the particle per ce but the smallest size of the particle that we can observe.